kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I don't think that was clear from the original post BUT does this mean anything someone is very passionate about is a dealbreaker? Its a little different when we are talking about a very dangerous and life threatening hobby that isnt necessary. Especially when homeboy goes out racing, has had a small amputation, and has children. This is exactly why some people out there dislike dating those with dangerous jobs or hobbies. They ask themselves "Do I really want to become so invested in someone who has a greater chance of dying on me and/or our children...simply because they choose that path when other safer paths exist?"
ThaWholigan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Of course not. There's just some activities that don't appeal to me. Also, if a guy makes a particular hobby his number 1 priority, he's not relationship material. The relationship needs to be the number 1 priority. Interesting post, thread material almost....
azsinglegal Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I'm a rider, not a biker. BIG difference. I ride dirt, street and dual sport. Sport bikes, not cruisers. Let him find someone who shares his interest, you obviously don't. I'd never date a man who had an issue with me riding. It's a deal breaker for sure.
Emilia Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Its a little different when we are talking about a very dangerous and life threatening hobby that isnt necessary. Especially when homeboy goes out racing, has had a small amputation, and has children. This is exactly why some people out there dislike dating those with dangerous jobs or hobbies. They ask themselves "Do I really want to become so invested in someone who has a greater chance of dying on me and/or our children...simply because they choose that path when other safer paths exist?" I date people that do things like that all the time and vice versa. I lived in Africa for a while too where even just a mosquito bite is dangerous. Not everyone is wrapped up in cotton wool
Emilia Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I'm a rider, not a biker. BIG difference. I ride dirt, street and dual sport. Sport bikes, not cruisers. Let him find someone who shares his interest, you obviously don't. I'd never date a man who had an issue with me riding. It's a deal breaker for sure. +1. I'm about to buy my first bike for commuting reasons and if a man had an issue with that I would just laugh in his face
Emilia Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Of course not, I'm sure if he was passionate about...gardening or something, OP would be okay with that. I'd be fine with that. I just HATE motorcycles, as does the OP, so that is a dealbreaker. Nothing wrong with that...we all have dealbreakers. Passion in general isn't the issue here, at all. I think it is. The OP is stating in a post that she thinks relationships should be number 1 priority
kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I date people that do things like that all the time and vice versa. I lived in Africa for a while too where even just a mosquito bite is dangerous. Not everyone is wrapped up in cotton wool YOU dated people like that, and YOU were ok with living in Africa in dangerous conditions. If that works for you, then cool. Many other people wouldnt date folks who participate in dangerous activities when they arent necessary. And personally I wouldnt live in any area where I could get a life threatening disease, unless I wore some type of protective clothing. Or some anti bug spray and netting around my living quarters. I think it is. The OP is stating in a post that she thinks relationships should be number 1 priority I think it a relationship should definitely be one of someones top priorities...and should be considered dearly when it comes to someone dangerous life threatening hobbie.
Author PinkInTheLimo Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 Especially when homeboy goes out racing, has had a small amputation, and has children. This is exactly why some people out there dislike dating those with dangerous jobs or hobbies. They ask themselves "Do I really want to become so invested in someone who has a greater chance of dying on me and/or our children...simply because they choose that path when other safer paths exist?" If my partner would get run over by a careless driver, or getting hurt in a robbery, I would wake day and night at the hospital at his side. It would not be his fault. But if he would be in hospital because the idiot wanted to participate in a motorcycle race, I would be furious with him . Because I would feel he's imposing unnecessary misery on me with his reckless behaviour. I would like to hear all those who find a biker so sexy when biker man is paralysed after a motorcycle accident. You don't know what your fate is, but I really don't feel the need to challenge it too much.
Art_Critic Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 You don't know what your fate is, That is also true for people who drive cars too and even people who don't drive cars but walk..
donnamaybe Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I don't think that having a very different life style is a superficial reason not to date someone. Everyone has to decide for themselves what is important and not. This is important for me so there is no need for you to be so judgemental about it. You are probably still young but if you are my age, you have seen enough relationship break-ups to know that a different lifestyle can seriously jeopardise a relationship. I know what is important for this man and I don't want to have anything to do with it.You are right. It isn't a superficial reason at all. At least you aren't doing what so many others do which is to get involved, thinking you will change him.
Author PinkInTheLimo Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 That is also true for people who drive cars too and even people who don't drive cars but walk.. Well isn't that exactly what I am saying? Life is dangerous and unpredictable enough as it is, I don't feel the need to flirt with danger...
kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 That is also true for people who drive cars too and even people who don't drive cars but walk.. Yes, but all one has to do is look at accident statistics. You are far more likely to be injured of even killed by riding a motorcycle. No airbags to protect you, or a car around you. You fall off at any decent speed and youre kinda screwed. Even more so if your in traffic.
veggirl Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I think it is. The OP is stating in a post that she thinks relationships should be number 1 priority Well, if the relationship is going to work out long term, then I agree with her it does need to be the top priority. A brand new relationship, no it doesn't need to be, but once things are serious and headed for marriage or life partnership...then yeah. Well isn't that exactly what I am saying? Life is dangerous and unpredictable enough as it is, I don't feel the need to flirt with danger... This, exactly. Throwing out "you could get killed driving a car too! You could get killed crossing the street!" is meaningless.
azsinglegal Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 +1. I'm about to buy my first bike for commuting reasons and if a man had an issue with that I would just laugh in his face I have met men that have an issue with me riding, I end things immediately. That would be like a man who had issues with my dogs. Both are who I am, I'm not changing...just like I don't expect anyone else to change. Btw, buying your first commuting bike, be smart about it.
Art_Critic Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Yes, but all one has to do is look at accident statistics. You are far more likely to be injured of even killed by riding a motorcycle. No airbags to protect you, or a car around you. You fall off at any decent speed and youre kinda screwed. Even more so if your in traffic. Here they are.. What say you ? FARS Encyclopedia
kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Here they are.. What say you ? FARS Encyclopedia Did you understand my previous statement? Its not about whether more people in cars die every year than in motorcycles. Its about RATES. There are more car drivers than cyclists, so obviously theres more car fatalities. Im talking about rates. And Im also taking about injury and fatality potential in a car vs a motorcycle. A cycle is FAR more dangerous. here ya go: "According to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in 2006, 13.10 cars out of 100,000 ended up in fatal crashes. The rate for motorcycles is 72.34 per 100,000 registered motorcycles.[1] " National Highway Traffic Safety Administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia My point stands.
Woggle Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I happen to like bikes and even at one time hung out with some Hell's Angels but if you are not into the lifestyle and it is one he is not the man for you. Nothing wrong with that.
Art_Critic Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 My point stands. IMO it isn't a really strong point.. The stats say that more people die in cars than motorcycles by far... by real far... Your point is that the number of motorcycles involved in fatalities ratio is higher than cars so therefore people should only drive cars. Using your logic then we should all ride in Buses, because they are the safest mode of transportation given the ratios. I guess it all comes down to what a person feels comfortable with.. If you don't feel comfortable driving a motorcycle because of safety then don't, the same can be said about air transportation for example.. there certainly are people who don't fly because they are afraid to die in a crash...
TheFinalWord Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Am I the only one for who this is a dealbreaker? I cannot see me being with a guy who owns a motorcycle, let alone rides one (way too dangerous). I am in contact with a guy via a datingsite. We had several email exchanges and he sounds like a good guy BUT he is a real motorcycle man. It's his passion and he made his job out of it. So the guy breaths motorcycles. He's hinted several times to meet but I think it is useless because I know that I will never be able to accept this motorcycle business. It's so not my world and I don't want anything to do with it. I hate the noise, the smell, the crowd around it and I think it is dangerous and bad for the environment. I mean, I had a boyfriend who loved sailing and although I had never done that in my life, it really appealed to me. I could share it. Or if the guy was a farmer, I also would be interested in it. But motorcycles, NO NO NO. I don't want to waste his time nor mine, so I'll mail him that further contact is useless. It's a pity because it really seems like a good and interesting guy but we are simply not compatibel. I don't think you're the only one by a long shot. I am the same way. Why risk your life for a thrill? To me it just doesn't make sense and I don't get any excitement out of life like that. BUT A lot of people do, and that's okay too. That's the beauty of America Do what you want to do. I dated a girl that wanted to do service medical work in Haiti and Africa. I wasn't cool with that. There's lots of people right here that need help. But she felt it was her life mission. More power to her! But I didn't want to be constantly stressed b/c my SO is in a third world country in which she could disappear and never be heard from again. I just couldn't imagine getting tied up in that type of relationship. But like I said, it's all relative. Life is too short. Do what you want to do. Have your deal breakers. I don't understand why there is so much arguing on this forum lately. If it is a deal breaker for you, that is just fine! If it's not for someone else, that's fine too! So many of you are so contentious it's no surprise that you have so many relationship issues! Just let it go! It's not your life, no big deal. If someone asks your opinion, feel free to share it. But it isn't necessarily a personal attack against you. People have a wide variety of interests...and that's perfectly fine! "My dad can beat up your dad!"
kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) IMO it isn't a really strong point.. The stats say that more people die in cars than motorcycles by far... by real far... What do you not understand about statistical comparison? Of course more people die in cars because more people drive cars than ride motorcycles. This is why fatality rates per capita is the prime indicator of which mode of transportation is safer. For ever 100,000 cyclist and 100,00 car driver, FAR MORE die on cycles than cars. There no way to misinterpret the number I presented unless you just refuse to believe factual stats. Whats so hard to understand? Your argument holds no water. Your point is that the number of motorcycles involved in fatalities ratio is higher than cars so therefore people should only drive cars.I didnt say they should only drive cars. I never said that. Please dont put words in my mouth. I said that cars are safer and motorcycles are not necessary for transportation, especially when it comes to long distances they arent. I said the increased risk of injury and death is why cars would be better for getting around, and why its ok if OP considers highly more dangerous motorcycles a deal breaker. Especially when this dude has already injured himself crashing, had surgery, but still continues to ride a lot despite having children. Thats very irresponsible. Using your logic then we should all ride in Buses, because they are the safest mode of transportation given the ratios. This is your best argument? You keep forgetting. I never said every SHOULD do anything. I said cars were safer. And now Im simply saying a car is a smarter option since motorcycles provide no advantageous trade off. If you want to compare buses to cars and trains, then yes people should use them when they can. Public transportation is much safer, however theres a trade off of travel time and availability. Public transportation does not exist everywhere, especially where I am in the suburbs of NYC. So buses have an advantageous and disadvantageous trade off to cars. Motorcycles provide no real necessary advantages to cars. Please make a better argument next time. I guess it all comes down to what a person feels comfortable with.. If you don't feel comfortable driving a motorcycle because of safety then don't, the same can be said about air transportation for example.. there certainly are people who don't fly because they are afraid to die in a crash...It does come down to what one feels comfortable with. But the facts remain. Cycles are far more dangerous to operate than cars. Thats a fact. Nothing can be said to change this statistically proven fact. The thing about air transportation is people dont have to fly to travel great distances. They can drive a car or sail a boat if they have to cross water. However planes have an advantageous trade off in travel time. As I said before, motorcycles provide no advantages over other automotive vehicles that travel great distances. Again, my point stands. Edited February 20, 2012 by kaylan
Art_Critic Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 This is your best argument? Dude.. this wasn't supposed to be an argument.... and on that ....
kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Dude.. this wasn't supposed to be an argument.... and on that .... I did not say we were having an argument. I used the word argument as a synonym for the word position. As in "is that your best position, or reasoning (or rebuttal)?" Argument: noun - A reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.
Art_Critic Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I did not say we were having an argument. I used the word argument as a synonym for the word position. As in "is that your best position, or reasoning (or rebuttal)?" Argument: noun - A reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong. dude.. what is your issue.. you are now arguing about the definition of the word argument.. hahaha This thread is sooo no worth it....
kaylan Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 dude.. what is your issue.. you are now arguing about the definition of the word argument.. hahaha This thread is sooo no worth it.... You are something else. You misinterpret my use of a word, so I then clarify myself, but then you have something else to gripe about? Gimme a break dude. I guess I expect this kind of response since you had no rebuttal for what we were actually discussing. Whatever dude.
Recommended Posts