Jump to content

Accept that people with plenty of options can "break the rules"


grkBoy

Recommended Posts

I'm talking about all those "guidelines" to dating, "Rules of Engagement", and even to some degree monogamy and such.

 

WHY? Because whoever gets mad at said person can be "easily replaced".

 

So the guy who won't commit and likes to play the field. He has plenty of women who will sleep with him at a moment's notice because they are all hoping to "tame him". Thus when one woman gets mad he can simply kick her to the curb and play with the rest of his "harem".

 

Or the woman who might be pals with her ex or likes to flirt with guys all over. The guy whom might be trying to build a RL can get angry at her, but she can easily tell him to buzz off and then move on to the next guy.

 

Why do I bring this up? To disparage those men and women who get mad at others who seemingly "break the rules" or have a lack of respect for anyone. If they have plenty of options, then they will break the rules and get away with it...because there are others who will gladly overlook the bad behavior.

 

Stop looking for the world to be fair. Do we all deserve respect? Yes...but when you meet said "bad person", you walk and move on...not work, hope, or argue on why they should be a "good person". The only time they decide to "change" is when they wake up and have no more options...or they are the rare types who actually met the one worth changing for.

 

The only way you get respect is when you respect yourself by walking and moving on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
when you meet said "bad person", you walk and move on...not work, hope, or argue on why they should be a "good person".

 

LOL, this is good advice, but most people don't realize they're with a "bad person." It's not like people walk around with a sign around their neck that says "I'm a jerk and I will break your heart." Usually it comes as a terrible surprise, and it's shocking and hurtful to make this discovery. People get upset when they've been deceived.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm content with the statement that in all my 34 years, there were no "surprises" until online dating. and the only surprises there are what the person who shows up is gonna look like and if they even remotely resemble what they wrote about themselves (or if they had their sister/friend/whatever write it for them).

 

the signs are always there they just need to be observed.

 

and i'm not saying i was never fooled, i have been, but hindsight always showed signs that could have been seen earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm content with the statement that in all my 34 years, there were no "surprises" until online dating. and the only surprises there are what the person who shows up is gonna look like and if they even remotely resemble what they wrote about themselves (or if they had their sister/friend/whatever write it for them).

 

the signs are always there they just need to be observed.

 

and i'm not saying i was never fooled, i have been, but hindsight always showed signs that could have been seen earlier.

 

It's amazing how many women online seem to think they're "average" weight wise when they're clearly pretty large.

 

Grk, I think respect in general society is at an all time low. Is it any surprise that people don't respect their peers in most cases?

Link to post
Share on other sites
ThsAmericanLife
Or the woman who might be pals with her ex or likes to flirt with guys all over. The guy whom might be trying to build a RL can get angry at her, but she can easily tell him to buzz off and then move on to the next guy..

 

Can you explain how being pals with an ex makes one a bad person?

 

I also work around all men. Sorry. The world really does need more engineers.. Maybe I should quit and be a schoolteacher or a nurse so a BF feels secure?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, you have it totally backwards.

 

People respect the rules more than they respect the people. Why do I think so? Because thinking outside the box may be OK in the world of business, but for whatever reason, thinking outside the box in the world of singles and dating is NOT appreciated because it shows disrespect for all these rules everyone is supposed to know.

 

For instance, there's a rule that says "never love the desperate", and another that says "a woman must never pick a man". Anyone who breaks those rules is shunned from then on. Damned if I know why.

 

There is an exception to this though, and it is spelled M-O-N-E-Y. If a man is rich, many women will be willing to break the rules and pick him---never mind that the guy may be a total creep. He's rich!!! Plus, a rich man can advertise any way he wants to... something men who make less that $100K a year get a lot of flak for when they try it.

 

So, no... you and I don't see eye to eye on this issue, but you're not on a different planet from me either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Greek. It's true in different ways. I think a lot of people operate on their own rules, and get angry or disappointed when others don't whether in a romantic relationship or any other. It's a bit selfish and presumptuous, imo.

 

If you're pragmatic, you realize that someone with more options may not have ever had to be humble and try to work things out or know what a truly good option is and value it. I have had a good number of options in my life, but I'm not sure that I had really great options. I don't want to waste any more time with someone who doesn't get the important things or have integrity, for example. However, I don't get bitter when I find I'm dating someone who doesn't have it. I just move on and try to be respectful to both of us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not saying i was never fooled, i have been, but hindsight always showed signs that could have been seen earlier.
In hindsight, I would agree wholeheartedly. The signs were there but I chose to ignore them. It would take a lot of mistakes and ultimately a failed marriage to help teach me to stop giving people the benefit of the doubt. They are who they are. Accept it.

 

Topically, I can't recall any woman I pursued who didn't have a lot of options and, retrospectively, exercised them with skill and dexterity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's amazing how many women online seem to think they're "average" weight wise when they're clearly pretty large.

 

Don't forget that "average" for Americans (both sexes) is overweight these days. (At least, that's the image I get from the media. I haven't trawled through the stats.)

 

(But, I know what you mean.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
WHY? Because whoever gets mad at said person can be "easily replaced".

 

Makes sense. When the consequence of bad behaviour is getting yelled at and dumped and then being single for a while (when you didn't want to be single) then there's some incentive to minimise bad behaviour. When the consequence of bad behaviour is being 'rewarded' by being able to replace the annoying person who got mad with another drooling sycophant then one might not even form a link between the person getting mad and the bad behaviour, to the point where the bad behaviour isn't even recognised as such.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO title is a misnomer.

 

Anyone can break the rules, it's just there are consequences. If people without many options decide to break rules and don't care about consequences, then I see no difference, if they had more options.

 

Regardless, not trying to change anyone is certainly good point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just be glad that people show their true colors. I do agree that as long as society rewards people who treat each other like that things will never change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
grkBOY -

 

You mention "Rules of Engagement". I only know that term from BDSM.

 

What does it mean in the regular dating world?

 

 

The rules, guidelines, etc...that people speak of or "follow" in their quest to find a SO.

 

A colleague mentioned to me a woman who posted a photo of her and her ex on her dating site profile. He of course brought up how much it's a faux pas, but I am of the mind that if she's got plenty of men messaging her, wanting to date her, then she can freely "break the rules" and get away with it.

 

It's like every woman I see who complains why the "ladies man" she covets won't commit and thus tries to fight the idea that he'll "break the rules" simply because he can easily kick her to the curb for other women.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, some single people always to seem to have an excuse , loopholes, or give them some kidn of "out".

 

So when someone gets mad at their behavior, they think the ONLY reason you should get mad, is if you're exlusively.

 

So THEY tell you, "What are you getting mad for? We're not a couple,"

 

 

 

I'm talking about all those "guidelines" to dating, "Rules of Engagement", and even to some degree monogamy and such.

 

WHY? Because whoever gets mad at said person can be "easily replaced".

 

So the guy who won't commit and likes to play the field. He has plenty of women who will sleep with him at a moment's notice because they are all hoping to "tame him". Thus when one woman gets mad he can simply kick her to the curb and play with the rest of his "harem".

 

Or the woman who might be pals with her ex or likes to flirt with guys all over. The guy whom might be trying to build a RL can get angry at her, but she can easily tell him to buzz off and then move on to the next guy.

 

Why do I bring this up? To disparage those men and women who get mad at others who seemingly "break the rules" or have a lack of respect for anyone. If they have plenty of options, then they will break the rules and get away with it...because there are others who will gladly overlook the bad behavior.

 

Stop looking for the world to be fair. Do we all deserve respect? Yes...but when you meet said "bad person", you walk and move on...not work, hope, or argue on why they should be a "good person". The only time they decide to "change" is when they wake up and have no more options...or they are the rare types who actually met the one worth changing for.

 

The only way you get respect is when you respect yourself by walking and moving on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty much the corollary of 'power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Humans will probably never evolve beyond the tug of the id. Feed it enough and it knows no laws nor master. Watching world events any day of the week provides enough examples of that. Relationships are merely an extension of the wider reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ThsAmericanLife
The rules, guidelines, etc...that people speak of or "follow" in their quest to find a SO.

 

A colleague mentioned to me a woman who posted a photo of her and her ex on her dating site profile. He of course brought up how much it's a faux pas, but I am of the mind that if she's got plenty of men messaging her, wanting to date her, then she can freely "break the rules" and get away with it.

 

It's like every woman I see who complains why the "ladies man" she covets won't commit and thus tries to fight the idea that he'll "break the rules" simply because he can easily kick her to the curb for other women.

 

Not everyone with 'options' chooses to exercise them. They have boundaries and respect their own relationships and the relationships of others.

 

On the other hand, I've met plenty of people (both men and women... but mostly men) who didn't have so many 'options' at some point in their life... so that if/when women do start hitting on them, they are just so overwhelmed with the attention... that they don't know how to deal with it.

 

Those are the ones I worry about as possible cheaters... as much or more than the ones who always took relationships lightly (ie, 'players')...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On the other hand, I've met plenty of people (both men and women... but mostly men) who didn't have so many 'options' at some point in their life... so that if/when women do start hitting on them, they are just so overwhelmed with the attention... that they don't know how to deal with it.

 

Those are the ones I worry about as possible cheaters... as much or more than the ones who always took relationships lightly (ie, 'players')...

 

So the guys who have a lot of options and the guys with no options are bad cheating risks . . . who's left?

Link to post
Share on other sites
ThsAmericanLife
So the guys who have a lot of options and the guys with no options are bad cheating risks . . . who's left?

 

I'm saying that men with lots of options aren't necessarily 'bad' people if they manage their 'power' wisely.

 

People with few 'options' aren't cheating risks if they learn that having options doesn't affect their integrity as a human being... and can appreciate and feel grateful for the SO who chose to invest and love them. Too many of the 'no options' people feel like they 'settled' and so BBD the SO who committed to them the first chance they get.

 

The men (and women) with lots of options, but are still respectful, figured out that all that attention is probably meaningless. It is mostly about OTHER people wanting a piece of whatever they are giving off... and not always in a healthy way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ThsAmericanLife
You make the first poster's point. The men who take relationships lightly cheat all the time. I work with some of them and it's a running joke because they get away with it. I haven't had a relationship longer than a few weeks at 42 years of age, but you conclude I'm more of cheating risk than anyone. What sort of fuzzy braindead logic draws you to that conclusion I will never know, but you're not the first, nor the last who has made that accusation against those of us with few 'options'.

 

I'm saying that both are equal risks if you need to find validation outside of yourself.

 

One just has more opportunities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't forget that "average" for Americans (both sexes) is overweight these days. (At least, that's the image I get from the media. I haven't trawled through the stats.)

 

(But, I know what you mean.)

 

I went and looked it up because I'm a bit of a stats junkie. According to the CDC 33% of adults are overweight based on BMI ( which is a rather BS indicator). So the number is probably actually a bit lower. So still overweight is still nowhere near "average".

 

I personally came up with my own "translations" for online body types..

 

Prefer not to say - Usually pretty large

Slim/Petite/thin - Well this is usually most accurate

Athletic- They truly have an athletic type, or are more of an "average" type.

Average- Some women really do have average body type, most tend to be on the larger side.

A few extra pounds/curvy- Generally people that SHOULD be in this catagory put themselves in "average". People who are honestly in this catagory usually fit well into obese and even morbidly obese.

Large/voluptuous- I've actually seen very few people catagorize themselves as this. Even 300lb women seem to think that's "a few extra pounds" or "curvy".

Link to post
Share on other sites
I went and looked it up because I'm a bit of a stats junkie. According to the CDC 33% of adults are overweight based on BMI ( which is a rather BS indicator). So the number is probably actually a bit lower. So still overweight is still nowhere near "average".

 

Thanks for looking it up (even though it spoiled my fun). :)

 

I personally came up with my own "translations" for online body types..

 

Prefer not to say - Usually pretty large

Slim/Petite/thin - Well this is usually most accurate

Athletic- They truly have an athletic type, or are more of an "average" type.

Average- Some women really do have average body type, most tend to be on the larger side.

A few extra pounds/curvy- Generally people that SHOULD be in this catagory put themselves in "average". People who are honestly in this catagory usually fit well into obese and even morbidly obese.

Large/voluptuous- I've actually seen very few people catagorize themselves as this. Even 300lb women seem to think that's "a few extra pounds" or "curvy".

 

I broadly agree with you. However, I don't see those categories (or the ones used on OKCupid) as being a list in strict order from thinnest to fattest. In particular, "curvy" isn't just "more than average but less than full figured", and I'm not sure which side of "overweight" it goes; because it isn't a scale that works like that. ("Curvy" is a totally different body shape.) But, yes, lots of women (and I suspect that men do this too, but I don't look) underplay their size. It doesn't help when there's a category called "a little extra", which of course is a euphemism for "quite a lot extra".

 

I do sometimes get suspicious of someone who describes herself as 'average' and has no photo showing anything below the chin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for looking it up (even though it spoiled my fun). :)

 

 

 

I broadly agree with you. However, I don't see those categories (or the ones used on OKCupid) as being a list in strict order from thinnest to fattest. In particular, "curvy" isn't just "more than average but less than full figured", and I'm not sure which side of "overweight" it goes; because it isn't a scale that works like that. ("Curvy" is a totally different body shape.) But, yes, lots of women (and I suspect that men do this too, but I don't look) underplay their size. It doesn't help when there's a category called "a little extra", which of course is a euphemism for "quite a lot extra".

 

I do sometimes get suspicious of someone who describes herself as 'average' and has no photo showing anything below the chin.

 

The first chin or the second chin?

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...