Els Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 As relationships go on, everyone will notice some flaws in their partner. If anyone claims that their partner is 100.0000000% perfect, I do not believe them. The problem is, how do you decide which you can live with and which are dealbreakers? How do you know if it's truly a dealbreaker, or instead a flaw in yourself (entitlement, selfishness, immaturity) that is causing you to overreact and thus call his minor flaws dealbreakers? Or what if those flaws that you thought were so minor, end up becoming unmanagable a marriage and two kids down the line? Was just reading the forums, contemplating my future, and pondering. Any insight would be welcome.
Melocoton Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 That is for you to decide. One thing may be acceptable for others but not for you. If they were "minor" flaws they would be managable. I'll give you an example of a dealbreaker for me, this woman I was dating likes to run from her partner when she had problems, she withdraws. The bigger the problem the more she hides. To me this was unacceptable. Here we are just dating and she pushs away and holds her feelings in. What will happen if we are married? Do I want a parnter that is capable of vanishing and keeping me in the dark? You know yourself and what you are willing to deal with best. Just be honest with yourself.
Trialbyfire Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 You can try to rationalize away your dealbreakers and allow resentment to drive you insane after awhile or you can accept them for what they are and select the partner that best meets your needs, in a natural way. I just don't see wasting time putting energy into not only trying to do your part in a relationship but also, fighting yourself. Makes no sense.
Author Els Posted March 22, 2009 Author Posted March 22, 2009 Yes, Melocoton, I was wondering how other people decide since I'm not so sure how I'd decide. Is it really that black and white for you? I find so many shades of grey in my decisions. TBF: But surely even the partner who most meets your needs will have flaws, will annoy/hurt you occasionally, and will have disagreements with you at times. Has anyone ever been through a LTR (of years) never doubting, never having trouble with anything their partner does? How do we decide whether to work with it and try to compromise, or accept it, or call it a dealbreaker right away?
Trialbyfire Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 Separate your wants and needs. Compromising or rolling over on needs, will turn into resentment unless you can somehow manage to change that need to a want, then letting it go. It's how both of you address issues. If you can't honestly discuss, de-escalate, resolve and permanently get rid of issues, you're headed for serious trouble.
SoulSearch_CO Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 I'd have to say the main thing for me would be how they make me feel in general. If that's overshadowed by "dealbreakers," then we aren't going to work out. Everybody has their preferences - I'm not sure what that would have to do with immaturity or entitlement. I would think having a well-defined sense of what makes you happy would mean you're a MORE mature person.
motive2002 Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 I'm aware and amazed by the differences in expectations we place on friends and family versus a significant other. When you first fall for someone they take on a magic, superhero type of quality that assures you that they are the "One" when in reality they are just another human being with as many issues as anyone else has. Just some thoughts.
SoulSearch_CO Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 I'm aware and amazed by the differences in expectations we place on friends and family versus a significant other. When you first fall for someone they take on a magic, superhero type of quality that assures you that they are the "One" when in reality they are just another human being with as many issues as anyone else has. Just some thoughts. I think that's called infatuation. Not true love at all. I did that with my last SO. It kept me from seeing what I needed out of a relationship. I never had the blind infatuation phase with my current BF. I SEE his flaws and I have had to decide what I can live with and if I'm essentially having my needs met. That's what's important. Most important is that I love him. I've heard before that we like people because of their positive attributes, but we love them because of their faults (probably because it means they're human just like us and it makes them relate-able). And yeah, I expect more from an SO. This is somebody that I'm considering spending the rest of my life with. Someone that I'd have to share a living space with, I'd have to eat with, drink with, sleep with, use the same bathroom, kitchen, etc. OF COURSE I'm going to expect more. I never shared a bathroom and bed with my mother.
Author Els Posted March 23, 2009 Author Posted March 23, 2009 I'd have to say the main thing for me would be how they make me feel in general. If that's overshadowed by "dealbreakers," then we aren't going to work out. Everybody has their preferences - I'm not sure what that would have to do with immaturity or entitlement. I would think having a well-defined sense of what makes you happy would mean you're a MORE mature person. What I meant by the immature/entitlement thing was this: Sometimes we think that a 'flaw' in our SO is a dealbreaker when the problem really was us. I used to have that problem in my very first relationship. I thought that an SO needed to be someone I could completely depend on, all the time -- in other words, a crutch. So if I was having a bad day and needed to talk, and he too was having issues of his own and couldn't give me the time and comfort that I needed, I construed that as I couldn't completely depend on him, and thus thought it was a dealbreaker. However, I now see that that was more my own problem than him -- I thought that I was entitled to being comforted and helped all the time; I never thought of the other party's problems. Motive -- I agree! To me that's one of the things that makes the honeymoon-phase transition the hardest -- a rise in expectations, taking for granted things that the person already does to you because it's 'stuff that bfs are supposed to do for their gfs', coupled with a decrease in effort.
SincereOnlineGuy Posted March 23, 2009 Posted March 23, 2009 As relationships go... a flaw in yourself Most of the "flaws in yourself" which doom relationships are those which inspire you to stick around beyond the point at which you were mistreated. Most people can do better than to remain with someone who makes a habit of treating them poorly. Those who cannot do better than that are best off by themselves, where at least there is *hope* of someone suitable entering the picture.
Island Girl Posted March 23, 2009 Posted March 23, 2009 For me dealbreakers are basic betrayals. Cheating, Lying, you know the deal... And then also: If my partner is not treating me well or meeting my needs and refuses to address that even after discussion. This is golden: It's how both of you address issues. If you can't honestly discuss, de-escalate, resolve and permanently get rid of issues, you're headed for serious trouble. So true. And I can say my partner is 100% perfect. He is perfect for me - we are a "fit" together because of communication and dedication to work out problems. We have been through rough spots. But it is the way we work through those and resolve them that makes it work so well. Now someone else, the way they'd communicate with him or him with them - eh, NOT a fit. But that counts for me as well. I fit him perfectly but I have found that not to be true with anyone else -- EVER.
BCCA Posted March 23, 2009 Posted March 23, 2009 I have very few dealbreakers, but these are the ones I'll mention: 1. Cheater. I dont care how mean your ex was, and how bad you had it, if I hear youve cheated, 99.9% chance we're done. I leave that 0.1% there because perhaps someone can convince me one day, but doubtful. 2. Very religious. I'm an aethiest, sorry, it just wont work. I dont want to be converted, and Im not going to try and convince you who is right. Believing in God is fine, but dont try and pass that belief off on me. 3. Hard drugs. Smoke a joint, fine - no big deal. If youre taking/have taken meth, heroin, crack, etc. I'll pass. Ive done coke before, long ago, so I would be a hypocrite to say that ever doing it is horrible, but if drugs come before your other responsibilities in life, no thanks. 4. More than 1 kid. Sorry, its just a personal choice. I guess there are always exceptions, but this is the rule. 5. Political affiliation. Maybe Don Trump and his wife can make it work, but I'm very liberal, and this comes into play in all parts of life. Abortion, death penalty, taxes...I want to give my kids what I think is the right message about these things, and I respect other peoples opinions, but I couldnt fathom being with someone on the other side of the fence. Other than that, I take them for what they are. If that sounds like a lot, maybe thats my problem
Sam Spade Posted March 24, 2009 Posted March 24, 2009 I struggle with this question, and I honestly can't think of one real deal-breaker (other than being a crappy human being). The problem is that many troublesome tendencies take forever to show up, so it's easy to make a poor decision based on imperfect information. Also, it is a matter of extent. I already know that my girlfriend is pretty passive, in all aspects, and that's one of the reasons I like her. But, *too* passive would be bad. So how do I know what constitutes being too passive (e.g. not making sacrifices when necessary etc.)? I have no idea. Sex can very hardly ever be a dealbreaker. The only sex-related dealbreaker is using it as a token of exchange. But again, how can you tell for sure unless you live together for years or get married? What somebody would/would not do is not an issue. Oral is great, but if my gf shies away from it (which she does), I don't care. There is a possibility that a resentment over this could build over time, but again - how do I know unless we spend years together? Etc., etc., etc., So, basically I have no dealbreakers, at least not easily discernible ones . As long as my girl is tiny, adorable, and sweet, we're a go, baby .
samspade Posted March 24, 2009 Posted March 24, 2009 Thought I'd confuse everyone and follow Sam Spade. Deal breakers are usually negotiable, it seems. Personally, I would not date a woman with children, or a woman who doesn't read books. Those are just two off the top of my head! Negotiable? Possibly. But I believe I should have certain standards that I don't betray.
Recommended Posts