miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 That being said, I have dated lots of men who lived at home, so it isn't a deal breaker, but it is definitely not something I seek out. In all the situations though, it made the relationship move at an odd pace.
Mrlonelyone Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Most responsible parents know how to take care of themselves... its not their kids responsibility to take care of the parent. Eventually you will learn to cut loose and take care of and live your own life. "Responsible" Only if they are rich enough to account for the cost of every possible health related thing that can go wrong. "Responsible" only if they are physically and mentally able to take care of themselves. I think you are unaware of the realistic range of effects that things like demential, alzheimers, and chronic health issues can have on adults over the age of 70. You need to get real.
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 "Responsible" Only if they are rich enough to account for the cost of every possible health related thing that can go wrong. "Responsible" only if they are physically and mentally able to take care of themselves. I think you are unaware of the realistic range of effects that things like demential, alzheimers, and chronic health issues can have on adults over the age of 70. You need to get real. Well this here is a huge age gap difference then... I can't say I know what that is like. If your parents are in their 70's then the dating game should be completely different as well due to the age group.
Mrlonelyone Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Some people don't get the difference in being independent and depending on your parents. It's like say, having a person who's early 20's living in dorms or in a parent paid for apartment.....telling someone who lives with their parents (or the other way around) how "independant" they are. Here's another thing to consider. As I learned the hard way in 2008. If you pay the rent, but your landlord dosen't pay the mortgage, guess who's going to get evicted. If you live in an apartment your not really all that independant. Your just depending on a different person or people. 1
CptSaveAho Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 "Responsible" Only if they are rich enough to account for the cost of every possible health related thing that can go wrong. "Responsible" only if they are physically and mentally able to take care of themselves. I think you are unaware of the realistic range of effects that things like demential, alzheimers, and chronic health issues can have on adults over the age of 70. You need to get real. If you read your original post and this one, it sounds like you are validating reasons to be miserable. I am real. I grew up. I did what you did until I was 24, had no inner peace, no happiness, was lonely, hated life. My parents are "surviving" on their own without me. I'm not their caretaker. I am their son. It's not my responsibility to take care of them. They should have taught me to survive on my own, like your parents should have. I had to go out and learn that all on my own and play catch up to the others that have been out since they were 18 You can choose to be miserable and continue what you are doing, or you can grow up and move out and live in the "REAL" world
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Being independent and financially independent are two different things. Living at home for no matter what reasons still isn't attractive, just because of the statements made in previous post. 1
Author singlelife Posted January 21, 2013 Author Posted January 21, 2013 Being independent and financially independent are two different things. Living at home for no matter what reasons still isn't attractive, just because of the statements made in previous post. I second that. I hope everyone reads it over and over and it sinks in!!
MrCastle Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 You heard it here first people. If you live at home, you might as well just kill yourself. Make sure you do it when your parents aren't home so they don't try to prevent you from doing it. 1
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 You heard it here first people. If you live at home, you might as well just kill yourself. Make sure you do it when your parents aren't home so they don't try to prevent you from doing it. Someone is taking things personally! Seriously, just because it's unattractive doesn't make it a deal breaker, maybe your personality is amazing enough for it to not matter!
MrCastle Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Someone is taking things personally! Seriously, just because it's unattractive doesn't make it a deal breaker, maybe your personality is amazing enough for it to not matter! I don't think it's unattractive. I think people who base attraction on petty things is what's really unattractive.
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I don't think it's unattractive. I think people who base attraction on petty things is what's really unattractive. Not so petty though. You have your preferences and I have mine. I live on my own, pay for my own stuff, and ultimately can do WHATEVER I want. Living at home makes that difficult, and I would rather date a man who does have his own place than one who doesn't. There are always exceptions to the rule.
Pyro Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 A good friend of mine will be 35 this year and is an awesome person. He lives at home with his parents because they are both older and both have health issues. He could have moved out years ago but chooses to stick around to help his parents. He isn't bitter at all about the situation because I am sure that he is aware that some women will be turned off by the situation. Everyone has preferences. 3
MrCastle Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Not so petty though. You have your preferences and I have mine. I live on my own, pay for my own stuff, and ultimately can do WHATEVER I want. Living at home makes that difficult, and I would rather date a man who does have his own place than one who doesn't. There are always exceptions to the rule. Like I said in my OP, it all depends on the individual case. I can do everything you do. I pay for my own stuff and come and go as a I please. I live in Westchester county where the taxes are some of the highest in the nation, no one my age has their own place. The most you'll see is roomates, and I don't do the roomate thing. I have a friend who is extremely emotionally immature, to the point where me and my other friends believe he has an actual developmental problem. He has the emotional maturity of a 12 or 13 year old, no exaggeration. He moved out earlier last year and lives with roomates. No college education, just getting by with the job he has. On the flip side, my neighbor who is 27, is married, she still lives at home and had her husband move in with them. She has 2 masters and a great paying job. They're saving up money to buy their own place. Not rent. Buy. Renting doesn't allow you to save. Moving out just to say, "hey look at me! I'm independent!" Doesn't allow you to save. I live at home because I refuse to do the roomate thing (my friend I mentioned before is screwed at the end of this year because everyone else is bailing and he can't afford the place on his own so he's more than likely gonna have to move back home). So I'm saving until I can afford a place on my own. If you think someone like him is a better catch than someone like me because he lives away from home, that's sad, and really the bigger point I was trying to focus on. The title is "are people who live with their parents a good catch?", assuming that you aren't if you do, and are if you don't. But that measures nothing about a person, as referenced by some of the posts in here. You can be a good catch and live at home for any multitude of reasons, or live alone and be a douche. Something as small as where you live does not determine the kind of person you are. 1
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Like I said in my OP, it all depends on the individual case. I can do everything you do. I pay for my own stuff and come and go as a I please. I live in Westchester county where the taxes are some of the highest in the nation, no one my age has their own place. The most you'll see is roomates, and I don't do the roomate thing. I have a friend who is extremely emotionally immature, to the point where me and my other friends believe he has an actual developmental problem. He has the emotional maturity of a 12 or 13 year old, no exaggeration. He moved out earlier last year and lives with roomates. No college education, just getting by with the job he has. On the flip side, my neighbor who is 27, is married, she still lives at home and had her husband move in with them. She has 2 masters and a great paying job. They're saving up money to buy their own place. Not rent. Buy. Renting doesn't allow you to save. Moving out just to say, "hey look at me! I'm independent!" Doesn't allow you to save. I live at home because I refuse to do the roomate thing (my friend I mentioned before is screwed at the end of this year because everyone else is bailing and he can't afford the place on his own so he's more than likely gonna have to move back home). So I'm saving until I can afford a place on my own. If you think someone like him is a better catch than someone like me because he lives away from home, that's sad, and really the bigger point I was trying to focus on. The title is "are people who live with their parents a good catch?", assuming that you aren't if you do, and are if you don't. But that measures nothing about a person, as referenced by some of the posts in here. You can be a good catch and live at home for any multitude of reasons, or live alone and be a douche. Something as small as where you live does not determine the kind of person you are. I think all of the above is valid, but when it comes down to it... if I had to choose between two great guys, lets just say for arguments sake they were equally awesome people, one had his own place and one lived at home... I would choose the one who lives on his own. You don't base whether a person is a good catch based on solely where they live, there are many other factors, but if I had to make a very GENERAL statement which the thread question pretty much is requiring.... No. People living at home are generally NOT a good catch. Oh and BTW, I know you are going all gung-ho, but the topic doesn't even really have anything to do with people in our age group to begin with. So cool your jets!
Disenchantedly Yours Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I think that people can be "good catches" in all matters of situations. Even when people aren't perfect and have certain weakness. Living at home might not be ideal for many, and it could point to an imperfection that person has, however, we all have imperfections and don't live our lives perfectly.So it's about what imperfections you can or can't put up with. And that's different for everyone. I can understand both sides of this situation. But I think each situation needs to be looked at differently and evaluated for itself. I liked the example one poster brought up about the girl that lives pretty close to her elderly parents but never helps them. There are also a lot of adults living on their own that have debt or live careless lifestyles. Immature people live on their own all the time. Ultimately, this is another factor just like you would factor in someone's age or how healthy they lived their lives or whatever qualties you individually looked for. I heard a report recently from Diane Sawyer about how more families are living together in multi-generational homes. I think this is actually kind of cool. 2
Mme. Chaucer Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 "Responsible" Only if they are rich enough to account for the cost of every possible health related thing that can go wrong. "Responsible" only if they are physically and mentally able to take care of themselves. I think you are unaware of the realistic range of effects that things like demential, alzheimers, and chronic health issues can have on adults over the age of 70. You need to get real. No kidding. My parents were certainly "responsible" and they actually did have the money for us to put our mom in a care facility because of her dementia, but I chose to live with her and see her life through to its end. It worked for me to do that, and honestly, if she'd been one of the very difficult Alzheimer's victims I would not have sacrificed all the quality of my own life to keep her at home with me. But she was not, and I'm very happy I was able to do that.
MrCastle Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I think all of the above is valid, but when it comes down to it... if I had to choose between two great guys, lets just say for arguments sake they were equally awesome people, one had his own place and one lived at home... I would choose the one who lives on his own. You don't base whether a person is a good catch based on solely where they live, there are many other factors, but if I had to make a very GENERAL statement which the thread question pretty much is requiring.... No. People living at home are generally NOT a good catch. Oh and BTW, I know you are going all gung-ho, but the topic doesn't even really have anything to do with people in our age group to begin with. So cool your jets! Yeah I'm younger than the people in question but I still have to call out an injustice when I see one. This is a public forum with different people with all different opinions. I'm not going gung-ho, I'm stating my opinion. Everyone who posted before me did it. Now I'm doing it. As for two men being equal except for one having his own place and the other not, it's a weak argument not based in reality. People are never equal. One is gonna be better or worse looking, have a better or worse personality, have more or less in common with you, etc. So that "all things being equal" thing doesn't hold. The last few women I've dated were in their early 30s. Pretty sure if they wanted, they could find a man their age who had their own place. They didn't. They chose me. Obviously those women didn't put stock in where I lived but rather who I am as an individual. Which works because those are the only kind of women I'd date anyway.
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Yeah I'm younger than the people in question but I still have to call out an injustice when I see one. This is a public forum with different people with all different opinions. I'm not going gung-ho, I'm stating my opinion. Everyone who posted before me did it. Now I'm doing it. As for two men being equal except for one having his own place and the other not, it's a weak argument not based in reality. People are never equal. One is gonna be better or worse looking, have a better or worse personality, have more or less in common with you, etc. So that "all things being equal" thing doesn't hold. The last few women I've dated were in their early 30s. Pretty sure if they wanted, they could find a man their age who had their own place. They didn't. They chose me. Obviously those women didn't put stock in where I lived but rather who I am as an individual. Which works because those are the only kind of women I'd date anyway. True, people are different. That is the point though, two guys can both be awesome, both for different reasons. I meet two awesome men, one has traits the other doesn't, to me, they would both be equals on a scale of date-able, other than chemistry being the end all, I ultimately would be more inclined to date whomever had their own place. It isn't an "injustice", its a personal preference. If what you are ultimately trying to do is say that I am a shallow person for preferring someone who lives on their own so be it. I must be shallow. I don't think I am, but if it makes you feel better then so be it.
TheZebra Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I didn't know you lived at home, MrCastle. Makes sense though... NY is expensive. When I lived up there the only place I could afford was a house with these two paranoid little old ladies who were terrified of men and had a bible in every room Good times though Currently living at home to save up for my own place. If everything goes well, I'll be buying very soon! Doesn't matter to me if the dude lives at home, as long as one of us has our own place for privacy's sake, it's all good. 1
MrCastle Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 True, people are different. That is the point though, two guys can both be awesome, both for different reasons. I meet two awesome men, one has traits the other doesn't, to me, they would both be equals on a scale of date-able, other than chemistry being the end all, I ultimately would be more inclined to date whomever had their own place. It isn't an "injustice", its a personal preference. If what you are ultimately trying to do is say that I am a shallow person for preferring someone who lives on their own so be it. I must be shallow. I don't think I am, but if it makes you feel better then so be it. I didn't use the word shallow, but do I think there's something to be said about people who put as much stock into where a person lives as it seems some people here do? Absolutely. I think there is a stigma attached to living at home that is just not reality. I'm not 14 anymore, the dynamics of the household have changed. I don't have a curfew. I don't get grounded. I'm merely a college student trying to save up money to move out into my own place. I come and go when I want. If I want to come home at 5am, I'm not going to be scolded. They're not going to have a family meeting about it. I don't have Ninja Turtle bed sheets. My life is akin to living with roomates, without the rent. This has, up to this point, never been an issue in dating for me. Now maybe that's because I'm still younger than the people in question, or because of the area we live in and this economy, people know it's just impossible to make it alone here, whatever, but no one is dumping people or rejecting to date people because they live at home, they're just not. 2
Pyro Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 If we are basing how good of a catch a person is solely on their living situation then I would consider anyone a good catch living with their parents, but NOT including those who are doing it because they are lazy or are afraid to be on their own. 1
MrCastle Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 If we are basing how good of a catch a person is solely on their living situation. Seems to me that's what this thread is about, and as Jaclyn said several times; "not a good catch", "unattractive" are some ways to describe someone living at home.
Samilia Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 If you read your original post and this one, it sounds like you are validating reasons to be miserable. I am real. I grew up. I did what you did until I was 24, had no inner peace, no happiness, was lonely, hated life. My parents are "surviving" on their own without me. I'm not their caretaker. I am their son. It's not my responsibility to take care of them. They should have taught me to survive on my own, like your parents should have. I had to go out and learn that all on my own and play catch up to the others that have been out since they were 18 You can choose to be miserable and continue what you are doing, or you can grow up and move out and live in the "REAL" world Yes, you're their son, not the caretaker. The caretaker gets paid, you should do it because they are family. What's the real world really? A miserable place where you have to fend off for yourself, or a miserable place where you know you can count on your family? 2
miss_jaclynrae Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Seems to me that's what this thread is about, and as Jaclyn said several times; "not a good catch", "unattractive" are some ways to describe someone living at home. Oh gosh. You obviously are so upset by what I said that you have tunnel visioned it and can't see ANYTHING else I said. 1
edgygirl Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Other than for exceptional reasons (taking care of elderly or sick parents, losing a job due to bad economy, etc.), I see a man who prefers to live with his parents as a bad catch. I like a man who prefers to cut the umbilical cord and be an adult, and live as one. Which means having to take care and responsibility for his own life, his own bills, his laundry, having a life of his own, which are the qualities I seek in a partner. It's funny that in my original country it's fairly common for men to live with their parents until they get married at age 40, but I believe it's mostly because historically they couldn't afford to get a place by their own. Now that the economy is great, most are moving out. I dated one of those 35 yo, with rich parents, who had a medical profession and lived with his parents in a huge secluded mansion with a pool etc. He didn't seem eager to progress in his profession because he had it all at home. The relationship did not move forward because it seemed he was so used to living a teenager's life going out at night and having food and laundry taken care for him... that why on Earth would he want to change that? Nah, I pass. I prefer adults who want to be independent and have their own life with no mommy to come to the rescue. 2
Recommended Posts