Pyro Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Castle you get partial credit for the inspiration of this thread. When it comes to finding someone and establishing a long term relationship with them how much compatibility to you look for or even expect with that person? Is there a minimum amount? Is 100% compatibility something that is realistic or a fantasy? If 100% compatible is real does that mean that compromise would never exist with a 100% compatible relationship? Would a relationship without compromise become boring? So many questions but I am curious, so I'd love to hear from you all.
january2011 Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Attraction first. Compatibility second. After trying OLD, I realised that it doesn't matter how "compatible" someone appears to be on paper, there's no point in moving forward if there's no attraction. The one guy with whom I had 100% compatibility ended up being a jerk and I had to block him. I like to share knowledge with my partners. I like it when we both have something to teach the other. It's great to have similarities because it helps you to build a good foundation, but it's the differences that make your shared life together more interesting. So, I guess, yes, with no compromise because there's nothing to compromise on, life probably would become a little samey.
xxoo Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 IMO, compatibility is important for the big issues: kids or no kids? how many kids? How are we going to raise these kids? What kind of life to we want to live: chasing the dream, or more relaxed? Big stuff like that. I don't think compatibility is nearly so important when it comes to specific hobbies, interests, careers, etc. As long as there is some overlap, providing opportunities to bond and have fun together, that's enough. For me, attraction needs to be very strong. Strong attraction, and deep loving feelings, are a "lubricant" that help make compromising much easier. Even pleasant! But compromise on the "big" stuff can lead to core unhappiness, and resentment, and corrode the love and attraction. 1
tbf Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Compatibility has so many elements and should be divided up into needs and wants. Needs are what xxoo has expressed as the big stuff. Wants are trivial stuff, like one partner needing specific sex acts that the other partner dislikes or the need for E cup breasts or washboard abs, in order to be sexually attracted. People and love are so much more than petty sh*7. 1
carhill Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 When it comes to finding someone and establishing a long term relationship with them how much compatibility to you look for or even expect with that person? Is there a minimum amount? Enough that we don't feel the impetus to markedly adapt or alter our base emotional and communication styles when authentically shown. The authentically part is critical since many people 'adapt' some parts of their personal style when infatuated/in limmerance. I note this when interacting with strangers, newly met, where we 'get' each other and interaction flows without 'thinking about it'. I'm not talking infatuation here, but rather basic human interaction. We can have markedly different life experiences and opinions on different aspects of our lives but 'get' each other's POV Is 100% compatibility something that is realistic or a fantasy? IMO, perfect synergy is unrealistic. Each of us is unique. Even genetic twins have differences, but perhaps illustrate some of what I'm 'getting at'. If 100% compatible is real does that mean that compromise would never exist with a 100% compatible relationship? Perhaps, in theory, but in practice there is compromise in nearly all aspects of life. The more we 'get' each other, the more smooth and rancor-free are the compromises. Would a relationship without compromise become boring? If such a relationship were possible, I doubt it would be 'boring', rather would be focused on aspects of life other than the machinations of relating to another person. Life is as exciting or as boring as we each perceive it to be and we're each unique human beings. 1
Author Pyro Posted April 21, 2013 Author Posted April 21, 2013 Attraction first. Compatibility second. After trying OLD, I realised that it doesn't matter how "compatible" someone appears to be on paper, there's no point in moving forward if there's no attraction. The one guy with whom I had 100% compatibility ended up being a jerk and I had to block him. I like to share knowledge with my partners. I like it when we both have something to teach the other. It's great to have similarities because it helps you to build a good foundation, but it's the differences that make your shared life together more interesting. So, I guess, yes, with no compromise because there's nothing to compromise on, life probably would become a little samey. Sorry that I wasn't more specific in the original post. The compatibility that I am speaking of is not related to physical attraction. I am referring to common interests and the connection between the two people. My questions already includes the assumption that there already is a mutual physical attraction.
january2011 Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Okay, so there's mutual attraction, connection and common interests? It's potentially a good start for a strong relationship. But I don't think that it would be possible to achieve 100% in all three, especially in the common interests component. I suspect that people who say that they are looking for a "challenge" would also feel that there was "something wrong," even if they couldn't quite put their finger on it.
AnotherRound Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Compatibility is paramount. Of course, that doesn't mean that they are the "same" but they have to work well together, make a good team. They won't agree all the time, but compromises should come easy - not be an all out war. Their core beliefs need to be similar, what they value needs to be similar. I don't think 100% compatible is really "possible", but I know a few couples who are just freakin' perfect for one another. Like, I couldn't imagine either of them with anyone else bc they just fit so well - and it's VERY obvious when that happens. Humans, by nature, will choose comfort over fulfillment damn near every single time. So many people marry people that they are not compatible with and then settle for this less than relationship. Some couples that aren't compatible are able to come to some kind of "agreement" or "truce" and make it work to some extent, but they are never really "happy" in the relationship per se, maybe comfortable, but not "happy". I will not waste my time with someone who I find incompatible with me. Life is too short to settle, and to be frustrated, or trapped in a relationship that does not fulfill me. I look for certain things that I KNOW I can't do without in a relationship (intelligence, compassion, considerate, nonjudgmental, open minded, someone who doesn't try to run anyone else's life and works to improve their own) and will not date people that exhibit things that I KNOW are incompatible with me (unintelligent, close minded, stingy, selfish, judgmental, god complex of making other people's choices for them, apathy about the world around us and the people in it). Could I make a relationship "work" with someone like the latter? Probably - but why would I spend so much time and energy trying to fit a square peg in a round hole when I could just as easily (easier!) find someone that fits better? Some people think it's more valuable to struggle for 50 years in a relationship, that it makes it more "real" or shows that they really love that person (or something like that). I think that is ludicrous, and a waste of energy and life and time. You can love someone you are not compatible with - but if you choose to be in a relationship with them, don't be crying down the road when it doesn't work bc you didn't want to take the time to find a good fit, or made a back choice in partners and it doesn't work out. My two cents.
candie13 Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 That is an interesting topic. Sometimes, I feel that attraction plays games on our minds and makes compatibility - or the importance of compatibility - fade away. Indeed, one cannot start a relationship without a healthy degree of attraction, irrelevant of just how compatible they are. To me, attraction is a dealbreaker. But it's a messy detail, because it can bring two very incompatible people together... So how do I view compatibility? I see a few directions that count so much: - A. BEHAVIOR - B. VALUES - C. WILLINGNESS and ABILITY TO COMPROMISE A. Behaviour Most people stop at behavior - how their partner reacts in certain situation and stop analyzing there. What they like, the activities they do, how they dress, how their friends are, the way they behave with their partner in private and in public, etc. So sometimes, it stops there: - s/he is always 20 min late at our dates. Always. Can't stand that - S/he is always waking up at 8, Sat and Sun including. Can't have that - s/he is talking with her mouth open / privileges her friends to me/ works out crazy hours / can't live with that. Ok, but what if they can find a good compromise and tailor their behavior so that they seem "compatible"? B.The real test is that of VALUES. Do both partners feel the same way about God? Politics? Sports? Family? Kids? Lifestyle approach? The more similar their values are, the more chances they have to form a sound couple, because their appreciation of the common set of value will help them tailor their behavior around that. There are more subtle things such as: both people believe in marriage, both people want kids and they all agree on the importance of a saving money to offer their kids a "sound education". They may even both hate "the system". It's just that to some, "education" may mean providing so that their kid goes to Harvard or MIT (to understand "the system" and "beat it at its own game", whereas the other partner may think "education" as any university and the chance to explore the world, educate yourself by experiencing that first hand. Having a 16 years old backpacking for 6 months is totally different from preparing the entrance file and submissions to any Ivy League uni. That is my definition of hell. Aren't the values similar? God, identical almost? Aren't they coming to life in the most different way? For sure. C. And last. but not least "the willingness to compromise". Even the most compatible partners can feel the depth of the differences between themselves to be mindblowing. People are just so different. The real strength of a couple is not to come back and try to make it work "because sex is amazing", but because they want to be better people and better partners. All relationships are hard work. All. Some may seem easier, smoother, compared to others. But in the end, it's all about how much pleasure and insight that relationship brings to the 2 partners, versus effort. Or despite the efforts. 4
Emilia Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 When it comes to finding someone and establishing a long term relationship with them how much compatibility to you look for or even expect with that person? Is there a minimum amount? Is 100% compatibility something that is realistic or a fantasy? If 100% compatible is real does that mean that compromise would never exist with a 100% compatible relationship? Would a relationship without compromise become boring? So many questions but I am curious, so I'd love to hear from you all. For me it's about being compatible when it comes to non-negotiables: - I've never wanted children so for LTR I would not look for someone who wanted kids and wouldn't accept that I don't. - I'm an atheist, I would not have an LTR with a religious person because values behind atheism are very important to me. Rationality is hugely important to me. - I wouldn't want to be with someone who is just sheep and doesn't take interest in what is around him and doesn't question it from time to time. - I would want someone who is able to work through conflicts constructively rather than retreat to his shell to stonewall. The above are non-negotiables I think, the rest is up for compromise. Hard to put a % on it 1
Els Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Compatibility in all the ways that matter to ME, yes. As tbf says, needs vs wants. For me, such compatibility would be inextricably linked to attraction. I am not usually attracted to men who aren't compatible in the ways that matter to me. I also find that compatibility is not the only necessary ingredient in a healthy R. Personally, I am willing to sacrifice a bit of compatibility in moderately important aspects (communication style, etc), for someone who is willing to compromise, willing to hold on and work on problems with me, and who has proven that he genuinely loves me and prioritizes treating me well. 1
USMCHokie Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Do you think compatibility can be developed, or is it something you either have or you don't? Can time together and a willingness to grow and develop as a team change the individuals to make the team better?
Emilia Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Do you think compatibility can be developed, or is it something you either have or you don't? Can time together and a willingness to grow and develop as a team change the individuals to make the team better? Do you think fundamental values can be or should be changed? 1
USMCHokie Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Do you think fundamental values can be or should be changed? Probably not. But are all values fundamental? What if your partnership with someone changes those values and makes you a better person?
Emilia Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Probably not. But are all values fundamental? What if your partnership with someone changes those values and makes you a better person? It would make me a different person, not necessarily a better one. I think I have strong morals that are accepted in Western secular society, my value system is based on that. At the age of almost-41 I think I know what they are fundamentally and trying to change them to turn me into a different person that would not be perhaps as genuine as my current persona.
USMCHokie Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 It would make me a different person, not necessarily a better one. I think I have strong morals that are accepted in Western secular society, my value system is based on that. At the age of almost-41 I think I know what they are fundamentally and trying to change them to turn me into a different person that would not be perhaps as genuine as my current persona. True. We all have values that are immutable, but we also have some which will evolve as we live our lives. Being with someone in a relationship will always be a source of that evolution. This is why I never understood people that said that they didn't want anyone "changing" them...isn't learning and growth part of a relationship? 1
Emilia Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) This is why I never understood people that said that they didn't want anyone "changing" them...isn't learning and growth part of a relationship? I think this is when I usually say that there is a fine line between growing and losing your self-identity. I think as you mature you start having a stronger self-identity which overall is a good thing, especially if you have children. However, that does not mean at all that you become incapable of growth. It means you believe you are able to question what is positive and beneficiary for you and what is noise. My last ex tried to turn me into a different person. It is a very good example actually. As you obviously know by now I'm quite a forthright, honest and direct person who can be also aggressive and outspoken. He was uncomfortable with that and he wanted me to become much more restrained in a way. That made me feel I was not able to express my true self and it angered me that he thought his value system was superior to mine so I broke up with him quite quickly. I could have tried to force myself to accommodate his wishes but it would have been unrealistic to say the least and quite impossible. Edited April 21, 2013 by Emilia 1
USMCHokie Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 That made me feel I was not able to express my true self and it angered me that he thought his value system was superior to mine so I broke up with him quite quickly. I could have tried to force myself to accommodate his wishes but it would have been unrealistic to say the least and quite impossible. That doesn't sound like compromise...
Emilia Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 (edited) That doesn't sound like compromise... That's my point. He challenged my fundamental value system. I don't feel I should compromise on my core values just because someone else is uncomfortable with them. Maybe I can explain this better with a more specific example: my ex didn't believe in expressing opinions or judging people () but to me it's a fundamental belief that it's something that everyone does - except some people admit to it and others don't. I belive in self-awareness and honesty. So that's one. Another was relating to a time when a guy aggressively tried to beg some money off me because I was on my own at a train station waiting for a pick-up car and he took advantage of the situation (I had already said no to him when he asked earlier). So when I realised he was trying to take advantage of me, I stepped up the aggression and told him in very certain ways what I thought of him, partly because sometimes best defence is offence. My ex thought I should have just kept quiet or call for help rather than handle it myself offending the guy in the process. See what I mean? There was no incentive for me to change my core values in this case, to 'compromise' because I believe his belief system goes against everything I value (ie expressing yourself openly, standing up for yourself, being strong and independent, etc). I would not compromise on these things. I would compromise on getting a cat instead of a dog or moving to a different part of London or eating less meat, etc. EDIT: his issue with my handling the aggressive beggar wasn't that he was worried about my safety but that I was aggressive towards a person who tried to take advantage of me. His views on this are not superior to mine, just different. However, fundamentally opposites. Edited April 21, 2013 by Emilia 2
melodymatters Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 I'm never sure how to proceed with threads like these :when the discussion gets too theoretical I tend to lose interest, but I always feel getting anecdotal might be boring for others. ( Not me, I LOVE hearing everyone;s life stories) So, I guess it depends on our definition of compatibility. My H and I have pretty much nothing in common, almost ridiculously so ! He plays video games, I read books, he like's crap food and a lot of it, I like teeny portions of healthy gourmet food. He's country, I'm city, he works with his hands and can fix anything: " blue collar", I'm a writer, artsy, sales type, he's non confrontational and I have a crazy Italian temper, He's a spender, i'm a saver, he's super shy and I'm extremely outgoing, and the list goes on... Where our compatibility comes in, and it's huge one, is our relationship styles and values. We BOTH put our relationship first before everything. We both are very verbally and physically affectionate, we both prefer to be with each other when socializing with others, we both are on the jealous side, and don't keep ex's in our lives, we both make each other our "Home". Having dated people with a lot more in common on paper, but different emotional styles, I can say by FAR it is more important not that you like the same shows, or sports teams, but that you both have the same love languages. In fact our lack of "on paper" comparability might even make us respect each other more. I'm shocked and awed when he replaces our brake pads himself and it costs only 15 bucks, he grins like a proud parent when he watches one of the plays I produce. Sometimes when you are too much the same you can start being as critical with your partner as you can be with yourself ! 3
Emilia Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Where our compatibility comes in, and it's huge one, is our relationship styles and values. We BOTH put our relationship first before everything. We both are very verbally and physically affectionate, we both prefer to be with each other when socializing with others, we both are on the jealous side, and don't keep ex's in our lives, we both make each other our "Home". Having dated people with a lot more in common on paper, but different emotional styles, I can say by FAR it is more important not that you like the same shows, or sports teams, but that you both have the same love languages. In fact our lack of "on paper" comparability might even make us respect each other more. I'm shocked and awed when he replaces our brake pads himself and it costs only 15 bucks, he grins like a proud parent when he watches one of the plays I produce. Sometimes when you are too much the same you can start being as critical with your partner as you can be with yourself ! I think so. It's interesting to be with someone who has very different take on certain things, different interests, comes from a different background. You have to be on the same page when it comes to building blocks in a relationship though. 1
candie13 Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Where our compatibility comes in, and it's huge one, is our relationship styles and values. We BOTH put our relationship first before everything. We both are very verbally and physically affectionate, we both prefer to be with each other when socializing with others, we both are on the jealous side, and don't keep ex's in our lives, we both make each other our "Home". Having dated people with a lot more in common on paper, but different emotional styles, I can say by FAR it is more important not that you like the same shows, or sports teams, but that you both have the same love languages. One should not mistake similarity with compatibility. Some people are a lot more comfortable with someone more similar, others treasure more the differences, because it balances them. I've mentioned sports in my previous post, as a symbol for a hobby that one might really really be into. My dad is a football (soccer) fan. He is very difficult to live with, especially during any championship - from UEFA to Champions League to the World Cup. So a woman needs to be ready to accept that / tolerate that, irrespective of her passion (or lack of passion) for that sport. I equally treasure a lot more people different from me - to a certain extent. I agree that it is easy to make theories, but they fall into place differently, when being brought into practice, in the real world. There are studies showing that all women are aware of their own "must have"s and "must not haves" before meeting a guy, however these lists are drastically revisited when meeting different types of men. Reality is a lot more complex and far richer than any pre-set list, and IMHO, intelligent people adapt to it. In a way, that is also a big big part in "compatibility": - just how much are you willing to compromise on? how about your partner? - just how much effort? how about your partner? - are these efforts / compromises appreciated by your partner? Is he returning these favors? is he (by himself) working at building that sound relationship, making you happy, improving himself and your relationship? - is he a giver as much as a taker? - how does he take criticism? Does he admit faults? Is he willing to make efforts not to repeat the things that hurt you? Does he communicate clearly / do you understand his points? - Do you respect your partner? Are you placing his needs and desires at the same level as yours, below or above? How are decisions being made? - all relationships have patterns. Are both partners happy with that pattern / dynamic? I believe that what really unites two people is common goals. A family. Projects. Doing things together. However, having a common goal doesn't preclude the importance of the process. I believe this is where a lot of relationships get stuck, also, at the beginning, both partners had the best of intentions and did agree on a common goal. I am having the most difficult time to get synchronized with my bf. A lot of people may say :"if it's that difficult at the beginning, it won't get better afterwards". We are similar in so many ways - both have strong characters, quite big egos and a feisty temper. Passionate and dedicated too. But are so very different in so many other ways: I like to have a bit more control on things, I like to so a lot of things, travel, see friends. He does too, but he is more driven by the impulse of the moment, by what he feels like doing. I think he has a bit of difficulties to accept that thinking for two is different from thinking for one. He is smart and driven... it's just... I believe he needs time to slowly adapt to the concept / and behavior of a relationship - he's 38 and was always used to doing whatever he pleased whenever he felt like it. If ever he does, of course - there's always a risk there, ain't it?
candie13 Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 Do you think compatibility can be developed, or is it something you either have or you don't? One can work on compatibility, if there's attraction. No attraction makes compatibility pointless - personally. In a way, it all depends on the big prize. No one likes to work... unless you very much enjoy the "big prize" (are happy with your partner, amazing sex, excitement, sense of victory / achievement... positive emotions), I believe intelligent people might decide to make the effort of working on compatibility, if it's reasonable to do so: pleasure versus pain ratio is positive. And... if both people are patient, of course (compatibility doesn't just happen) Can time together and a willingness to grow and develop as a team change the individuals to make the team better? Of course time together changes the individuals. Ideally, time together would make each of the partners better, individually, and create amazing synergies when brought together - achieving things together that they might not have, left alone. However, it all depends on the couple. It's every partner's responsibility to be aware of the direction they are growing, because they have to stay true to themselves, first. Each one of the partners should be happy, individually, not just in a couple and should not try to mould their partner into something they are not. So while a good, sound common direction is important, so is a healthy amount of positive "selfishness". IMO, it's important to preserve your own identity, hobbies, friends, what makes you different from your SO, a certain degree of independence and not lose yourself in your relationship. So yeah, better team is a lot better than better individuals, as long as each one of these individuals preserve their identity and are happy - individually and in a couple. I believe it's those differences that actually feed the relationship and allow it to grow, just as much as the common sense of direction.
candie13 Posted April 21, 2013 Posted April 21, 2013 True. We all have values that are immutable, but we also have some which will evolve as we live our lives. Being with someone in a relationship will always be a source of that evolution. This is why I never understood people that said that they didn't want anyone "changing" them...isn't learning and growth part of a relationship? you are pointing out the "open-ness", flexibility of a person, facing the world. Learning - means being aware of your ignorance and taking clear action into changing that. There is no learning if one does not want to acquire knowledge. Growing involves transformation. Transformations implies change. Change means that one is supposed to willingly go out of their comfort zone and expose themselves to h/is/er SO. A lot of people think that they've done all the learning. They are mature, they've experienced things, they have seen it all. They take criticism or challenges as personal attacks because... they are not open to the world. To hearing something different. To accepting something different. Why? Different reasons: potential pain, potential failure, too much effort, too much energy wasted... fear. Blockages. Painful past experiences. It is easier to have a partner who accepts you as you are, compared to one who dares to challenge you. Comfort versus growth. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. It only means that these 2 approaches are different. Compatibility means choosing a partner who has the same approach to life as yourself.
Recommended Posts