Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Did you not read my whole post? I am in agreement with you.. my bar is low.. you have "selective criteria" I have a "checklist." like for example honestly, won't waste my time with people that aren't honest. I said that I won't settle, for example, on someone that lies but high standards leads to disappointment. I did read that your bar was low... and yet you still had an all encompassing list. What I'm telling you is that when you focus on certain things you want, you often miss things you didn't realize you need. What other checklist criteria do you use? How do you measure honesty on the first or second date.
ADF Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Do you feel you've lowered your standards and/or settled on your current significant other? By "lowering standards" and "settling" I mean that you feel as though you could do better, or that you deserve better, but, for whatever reason, decided to settle for your significant other rather than to wait to find genuine happiness with your "true love"? If you have settled, why have you done so, and are you are happy/content in the relationship viz. would you do it again? Finally, if you have settled on your significant other, would you end the relationship if you found someone else whom you felt could better meet your original standards? Also, if you haven't currently settled for anyone: would you settle and, if so, why? I think the question itself is a bit loaded. The fact is there is no settling down without some settling for. No two people are utterly perfect for each other in every way. All relationships require compromise. People need to stop waiting for "the one." The one is a myth. The one is a lie. Don't wait for the one becuase she/he ain't comin'.
Author always_searching Posted November 5, 2009 Author Posted November 5, 2009 Uh-oh.The thing is... people are fundamentally the same (we are all special, just like everybody else). The uniqueness, to the extent it occurs is much more the product of idiosyncrasies accumulated in the process of shared history in the relationship, rather than some 'innate uniquenesness'. This stuff is never obvious upfront, and even if it is - it is pretty meaningless (Why would I care if a girl I just recently met is sincerely scared by horror movies, or always carries her passport with her, etc. etc.??). It becomes valuable only when discovered and appreciated over the course of a relationship So, by setting the bar low i mean having very reasonable criteria (is she pretty? is she sweet? and that is it) to decide whether to go on more than a few dates with a person (i.e. whether it is worth to start a relationship, and thus have a chance to make these discoveries). I'm sure that there are girls that are hotter and smarter than my gf, but I wouldn't care - in the absence of shared history, they don't mean anything to me (other than, possibly, hawt azz ), precisely becaus I'd rather have her quirky pecularities, rather than someone with better resume. Related, the "suitability" criterion is also not very useful. Barring fundemantal incompatibility in life goals, suitability is to a much larger extent a function of the willingness of the partners to proactively pursue suitability/compatibility rather than a function of actual commonalities (e.g. in background, etc.). An old historical house, if properly maintained will last much longer and be much more pleasant to live in than a brand new house with no maintenance whatsoever. Well, your response is a very frank one. So, what I'm gathering from you is that your bar is set to a low standard (i.e. any decent looking person of the female variety) and the first person you meet that desires you and fits this standard is acceptable. So, since genuine uniqueness (since we're all the same) is established through your history together, you don't really need to get to know the girl, as she fits your standard of being an interested woman, but that you go ahead and create a relationship together that is inevitably more fulfilling than finding "someone with a better resume." Is that about right? I feel there is some inconsistency in your understanding of personhood: first you state we're all the same, but then you state that any uniqueness is not obvious upfront, and "even if it is - it is pretty meaningless (Why would I care if a girl I just recently met is sincerely scared by horror movies, or always carries her passport with her, etc. etc.??)." So, which is it? Are we all the same, or do we have a uniqueness? If the former, I can see why you would feel the need to settle for any woman and start a history with her creating the uniqueness, which you claim is "the product of idiosyncrasies accumulated in the process of shared history in the relationship." If the latter, then there is an element of individuality that needs to be considered when choosing your significant other. No, it is not obvious upfront, but there is an innate uniqueness within each individual person that one should desire to uncover and identify through dating in order to establish suitability for a long-term commitment. That's not to say that you don't create the former element as well--the uniqueness found within the shared history together. However, I think it would be insulting as well as depersonalizing to both you as well as your girlfriend to recognize that you started out not caring about the individual uniqueness of who you were dating, but that it was all very coincidental as she just happened to be the first decent looking female to show interest in you. If so, I have to admit, I still find it disheartening, more for you than for your girlfriend. You stated earlier that you know you could "do better," but I wonder if that's true. I would think by setting the bar this low--settling for the first girl who is decent looking and shows you any amount of interest--you would have to have some self-esteem issues. Of course, if you're truly happy in your relationship, then none of this really matters. I'm just interested in your theory, that's all.
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Heyyyy! I'm not sure if you're a man or a woman, but either way we should totally make out some time since that's exactly what I've been trying to express . All it takes is some level of emotional intelligence and commitment to make it work. And whether you got hitched in vegas or in a cathedral, figuratively speaking, is secondary, Here are a few more suggestions to reconcile the settling problem: - If you're not actually unhappy in your relationship, you are not settling, you'ew doing just fine (derivations: if you're content all the time, you're ahead of the curve; if you're happy all the time, you're probably on drugs )- If you are vaguelly unhappy/dissatisfied with your relationship for no particular reason, you have not only settled, but you're also a jackass and should go away and stop ruining people's ives I'm a guy... so a makeout scene would probably be super akward... but hey I'm down if you are. I wonder why women never seem to take this approach?
terra Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 You usually can't tell honestly in the first or second date but you probably don't think that you are "settling" after only one or two dates. Things that are important to me are if he is kind and respectful towards other people (can usually tell that one early on), doesn't have a short temper, can laugh at himself- not too serious, money isn't main focus in life, ... stuff like that. I think if these types of things don't line up it won't work between us.
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I feel there is some inconsistency in your understanding of personhood: first you state we're all the same, but then you state that any uniqueness is not obvious upfront, and "even if it is - it is pretty meaningless (Why would I care if a girl I just recently met is sincerely scared by horror movies, or always carries her passport with her, etc. etc.??)." So, which is it? Are we all the same, or do we have a uniqueness? Not to answer for Sam, but it's just so obvious. The answer is that it's both. We are all similarly unique. Your thinking that one person's uniqueness is better than another? If the former, I can see why you would feel the need to settle for any woman and start a history with her creating the uniqueness, which you claim is "the product of idiosyncrasies accumulated in the process of shared history in the relationship." If the latter, then there is an element of individuality that needs to be considered when choosing your significant other. No, it is not obvious upfront, but there is an innate uniqueness within each individual person that one should desire to uncover and identify through dating in order to establish suitability for a long-term commitment. That's not to say that you don't create the former element as well--the uniqueness found within the shared history together. However, I think it would be insulting as well as depersonalizing to both you as well as your girlfriend to recognize that you started out not caring about the individual uniqueness of who you were dating, but that it was all very coincidental as she just happened to be the first decent looking female to show interest in you. Your talking not about uniqueness or idiosyncrasies... but flaws, and yes there are personality flaws that can render any potential pairing a failure. If so, I have to admit, I still find it disheartening, more for you than for your girlfriend. You stated earlier that you know you could "do better," but I wonder if that's true. I would think by setting the bar this low--settling for the first girl who is decent looking and shows you any amount of interest--you would have to have some self-esteem issues. I would say the opposite. He has so much self esteem that he believes HE is what makes his significant other special. That takes alot of balls... and self esteem. Also, you say settling for the first girl... that isn't correct. In his scenario... he isn't settling... he is Choosing! That is a very different action.
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 You usually can't tell honestly in the first or second date but you probably don't think that you are "settling" after only one or two dates. Things that are important to me are if he is kind and respectful towards other people (can usually tell that one early on), doesn't have a short temper, can laugh at himself- not too serious, money isn't main focus in life, ... stuff like that. I think if these types of things don't line up it won't work between us. What if he has everything on your list, but he wears designer clothes, takes you to expensive restaurants, and tells you he works alot?
threebyfate Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Good for you TBF! I hope I can be so lucky! Thanks. That's always been my motto to not settle and haven't done so yet. This doesn't mean that I and all my partners were so fantastic, just that it takes time to find a compatible person, within reason.
aerogurl87 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Do you feel you've lowered your standards and/or settled on your current significant other? By "lowering standards" and "settling" I mean that you feel as though you could do better, or that you deserve better, but, for whatever reason, decided to settle for your significant other rather than to wait to find genuine happiness with your "true love"? I don't feel like I've settled for my SO as he makes me extremely happy. If he didn't we wouldn't be together, lol. On the same token I believe that I found the closest thing to my "true love" in my ex so I think finding someone I felt such an intense and passionate love for coupled with this eerie "we get each other" feeling, will be near impossible. As much as I can't stand the bastard, he was probably the closest thing to "true love" and "soulmates" I will ever get. Also, if you haven't currently settled for anyone: would you settle and, if so, why? I wouldn't settle, did that once before and I was miserable. If I'm not happy and I see no way of improving the situation, then I move on. No good can come of wasting both my time and some other person's time on something that will be dissatisfying to us both in the end.
SadandConfusedWA Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I define settling differently. If you are genuinely in love with your partner then you are not settling. It doesn't matter if he is 4 feet tall, unemployed and lives with his parents. If he makes you truly happy and you are crazy about him, you have found your true love. Now settling means that for some reason as much as you like your partner or even love them, you are just not "in love". He can be a multi-millionare surgeon and underwear model on the side, if you are not in love: you are settling.
C-i-C-u Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 No way. He's a wonderful man. Not applicable. Not applicable. Since I didn't settle, no way. I'm not a grass is greener type of person. I've never settled. TBF, what is your husband like? Shy? Quiet? Slightly overweight?
threebyfate Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 TBF, what is your husband like? Shy? Quiet? Slightly overweight?No, he's not shy, quiet or overweight. More like confident, intelligent, great sense of humour and fit. He's very much a de-escalator, rock solid internally and unafraid to speak his mind. He can also be impatient and a little insensitive, albeit the insensitivity portion suits me, since I don't have to worry about hurting his feelings or ego/pride. The best thing about him, is his integrity.
Sam Spade Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Well, your response is a very frank one. So, what I'm gathering from you is that your bar is set to a low standard (i.e. any decent looking person of the female variety) and the first person you meet that desires you and fits this standard is acceptable. So, since genuine uniqueness (since we're all the same) is established through your history together, you don't really need to get to know the girl, as she fits your standard of being an interested woman, but that you go ahead and create a relationship together that is inevitably more fulfilling than finding "someone with a better resume." Is that about right? I feel there is some inconsistency in your understanding of personhood: first you state we're all the same, but then you state that any uniqueness is not obvious upfront, and "even if it is - it is pretty meaningless (Why would I care if a girl I just recently met is sincerely scared by horror movies, or always carries her passport with her, etc. etc.??)." So, which is it? Are we all the same, or do we have a uniqueness? If the former, I can see why you would feel the need to settle for any woman and start a history with her creating the uniqueness, which you claim is "the product of idiosyncrasies accumulated in the process of shared history in the relationship." If the latter, then there is an element of individuality that needs to be considered when choosing your significant other. No, it is not obvious upfront, but there is an innate uniqueness within each individual person that one should desire to uncover and identify through dating in order to establish suitability for a long-term commitment. That's not to say that you don't create the former element as well--the uniqueness found within the shared history together. However, I think it would be insulting as well as depersonalizing to both you as well as your girlfriend to recognize that you started out not caring about the individual uniqueness of who you were dating, but that it was all very coincidental as she just happened to be the first decent looking female to show interest in you. If so, I have to admit, I still find it disheartening, more for you than for your girlfriend. You stated earlier that you know you could "do better," but I wonder if that's true. I would think by setting the bar this low--settling for the first girl who is decent looking and shows you any amount of interest--you would have to have some self-esteem issues. Of course, if you're truly happy in your relationship, then none of this really matters. I'm just interested in your theory, that's all. My newfound badass sidekick here (Untouchable ) provided an answer that's very close to my own, so I'll just reiterate that the "uniqueness" a given, and so it matters only when it becomes your mutual your own thing, and that's much more important than somebody with the "right" (unique...) set of credentials (down to political views, taste in literature, and eye color ). So yes the starting point doesn't matter nearly as much as the process; and of course it is coincidental - you can have a good relationship with many people. The issue is at what point you stop waffling and being undecisive and start a mafia family with your sweetie . To put it into even more direct l terms - I don't believe that the payoff of searching for somebody marginally better () comes even close to the payoff that I'd be getting of focusing on the relationship I already have. People are not cars to be picked and chosen, and even if they were, my case would still hold: you can spend years saving and going in debt to your eyeballs in the pursuit of the dream car (which then you're afraid to floor or scratch), or you can easily get a good value that you can have a lot more fun with. As for the self-esteem argument - note that it could go either way --> I could just as easily insist on having a superhero girlfriend out of low self esteem - I would need her for social validation (Oh, look at me, the chick on my arm is a hot doctor) This is probably attainable, but what about the cost in time, effort, uncertainty and the possibility of less than stellar qualities that more than offset the doctorness?)
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I don't feel like I've settled for my SO as he makes me extremely happy. If he didn't we wouldn't be together, lol. On the same token I believe that I found the closest thing to my "true love" in my ex so I think finding someone I felt such an intense and passionate love for coupled with this eerie "we get each other" feeling, will be near impossible. As much as I can't stand the bastard, he was probably the closest thing to "true love" and "soulmates" I will ever get. I don't understand this idea of soulmates. If I date 10 different women how am I supposed to know which one would be considered a "soulmate". They don't come with labels! How can your passion for one person be greater than another? That passion comes from YOU, not from anyone else. In fact the amount of passion I feel for someone at any given time depends much more on my circumstances than the other person.
Kamille Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I've never settled and I have had the opportunity to get to know some great men. The concept of settling doesn't make sense to me. I don't have a checklist or any some such thing. I just get to know people for who they are and once in a while I find someone with whom I truly click and then we see if we can make things work. I think people who "settle" are doing both themselves and their partner a disservice. I would be offended if I found out a guy felt he was settling for me. It would kind of mean either he had no respect for me or didn't care to get to know me. My current bf has, so far, exceeded all my expectations. We've only been together a few months, but I discover something new that I like at every turn it seems. He's handsome, understanding, sweet, passionate, caring, funny, sensitive and oh so manly. He's also very steady and not afraid fo commitment, which makes things really easy between us. I can bring up issues easliy because I know we both want what's best for us as a couple.
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 My newfound badass sidekick here (Untouchable ) provided an answer that's very close to my own, so I'll just reiterate that the "uniqueness" a given, and so it matters only when it becomes your mutual your own thing, and that's much more important than somebody with the "right" (unique...) set of credentials (down to political views, taste in literature, and eye color ). So yes the starting point doesn't matter nearly as much as the process; and of course it is coincidental - you can have a good relationship with many people. The issue is at what point you stop waffling and being undecisive and start a mafia family with your sweetie . Wait... how did I become the sidekick? I don't have to wear one of those weird suits like Robin do I? I kind of feel sorry for AlwaysSearching's BF. I would much rather have someone willfully choose me, and then feel that the relationship we built together is something very special, than to have someone who is with me because they think I'm the best they can do. I'm not sure I would trust that, because people change, passions come and go, life always throws curveballs. The women who live life by whimsical notions are the ones who bounce on you when the chips are down. I want someone who believes like I do, that even if someone amazingly better comes along 10 years down the road, it wont even be tempting because what really matters is what I already have.
Kamille Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I'm not sure I would trust that, because people change, passions come and go, life always throws curveballs. The women who live life by whimsical notions are the ones who bounce on you when the chips are down. I want someone who believes like I do, that even if someone amazingly better comes along 10 years down the road, it wont even be tempting because what really matters is what I already have. I think AS is single. I wanted to add, my expectations of what I want in a man has changed. I used to want a guy that would impress me - either by his attitude, resume, job, looks, popularity, whatever (very high school). Now I want a guy with whom I can build a good healthy relationship. So the premium is more on how we communicate and connect together than on who he is per se (though, of course, how someone communicates is part of who they are). But my relationships have improved tenfold since I changed my attitude.
aerogurl87 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 No, he's not shy, quiet or overweight. More like confident, intelligent, great sense of humour and fit. He's very much a de-escalator, rock solid internally and unafraid to speak his mind. He can also be impatient and a little insensitive, albeit the insensitivity portion suits me, since I don't have to worry about hurting his feelings or ego/pride. The best thing about him, is his integrity. Sounds like a great catch TBF And I agree, a guy who can take a slight blow to his ego is sometimes better because you can be more open and honest to him without worrying about him having a hissy fit about something you've said.
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I think AS is single. I wanted to add, my expectations of what I want in a man has changed. I used to want a guy that would impress me - either by his attitude, resume, job, looks, popularity, whatever (very high school). Now I want a guy with whom I can build a good healthy relationship. So the premium is more on how we communicate and connect together than on who he is per se (though, of course, how someone communicates is part of who they are). But my relationships have improved tenfold since I changed my attitude. Uh, then I was referencing a "future boyfriend". Your change in expectations is fairly similar to mine. I used to have some super shallow criteria. In fact, one of the best relationships I've ever been in was with someone who I would have rejected had I not put some thought into what I was doing.
torranceshipman Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) Imagine you are one of the two dudes in Weird Science, making your dream man/woman...the person you end up with should b pretty close...mine is! Seriously, I could never settle-what'd be the point? It'd only end up making me miserable and annoyed...being single would be so much better than that... Edited November 5, 2009 by torranceshipman
EcstasyX6 Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Very interesting thread... Sam, You must be a highly evolved person to accept a woman only on the basis of being pretty and sweet. That must mean that you are a very confident, loving, accepting man who would accept a woman's baggage no matter what from her childhood and past relationships, and deal with them because you love her for her. In an ideal world, we should all think this way, and the world would be a better place. This is called unconditional love I believe, and if this is truly the case, then I'd say you are exceptional. I think this is the way that most teenagers fall in love for the first time. It seems to be love at its purest most innocent form. Then when things don't work out, we think, "ah, we didn't get along because of XYZ", and after several failed relationships for whatever reason, over the years we began to craft in our minds the ideal person; consciously or subconsciously because our egos have been bruised. AS I settled by making this presumptive list in my 20s because I was immature and thought it was 'time' to get married. There was pressure from the family and society, and my STBX came along and hit most of my points, which really had nothing to do with me(i.e. career minded, intelligent, ambitious) It was all wrong. I was dating guys who my family didn't approve of, so I began to doubt my own judgement in picking a mate, so I began to make selections based on what others expected of me. My STBX was/is a sweet man, but we didn't connect because our life vision was very different. I think shared life vision is very important in a relationship, especially for marriage. Two kids and 17 years later, and after some therapy, I understand who I am, and what kind of partner would be better for me, but maybe I didn't learn how to love him unconditionally.:confused: My expectations from a partner now are very different, and his career choice has nothing to do with it anymore. And actually, tall and handsome are on the list. (my kind of pretty), sense of humor, honesty, passion(life and sexual), confidence. I wasn't able to ariculate some of this until I gained some life experience, and gained enough confidence to say to others, family and friends, go **** yourself regarding my choice of partner. As long as a person makes you happy, go for it.
deux ex machina Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I'll have to consult my Venn diagrams, astrological chart, do a background check, analytics, and an extensive physiognomy. If you look like good breeding stock, you might have a chance with the wonder that is Me. Don't call me, I'll call you.
Isolde Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 The core of this debate seems to be: Is it who the person is, or what you're capable of building with the person? I think both are important and they're inextricable from one another. But for sure, expectation management is part of starting to build a connection with someone that's actually sustainable, because no one's perfect.
Untouchable_Fire Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 Two kids and 17 years later, and after some therapy, I understand who I am, and what kind of partner would be better for me, but maybe I didn't learn how to love him unconditionally.:confused: My expectations from a partner now are very different, and his career choice has nothing to do with it anymore. And actually, tall and handsome are on the list. (my kind of pretty), sense of humor, honesty, passion(life and sexual), confidence. I wasn't able to ariculate some of this until I gained some life experience, and gained enough confidence to say to others, family and friends, go **** yourself regarding my choice of partner. As long as a person makes you happy, go for it. I don't think you get it yet. It sounds more to me that your currently settling... while previously you had something worthwhile. The people that are the most miserable, are the ones who are unable to appreciate what they have. The core of this debate seems to be: Is it who the person is, or what you're capable of building with the person? I think both are important and they're inextricable from one another. But for sure, expectation management is part of starting to build a connection with someone that's actually sustainable, because no one's perfect. Nobody is really arguing that one of those two is not important. The real argument lies within which of those points is most important. The more you focus on all the traits and features and titles that swirl around someone... the less likely you are able to see a real person.
Recommended Posts