Has anyone on here ever settled in a relationship?

[GoodOnPaper]

Yes. This is what I'm talking about when I ask if anyone has settled. For example, I have a friend who has been in a relationship with someone for six years. I know for a fact that she settled for him. She won't admit that she settled (most people who settle won't) but I have always known that she did based on the way she treats him and a lot of other things, too. This is not about her and her relationship though. I want to know for myself. Has anybody ever settled? What were the pro's and cons? Would you do it again? Why or why not?

 

Pros: Security & moving forward with life - she chose me, so there is no unspoken lingering threat of leaving if some other guy comes along like there always was with the few GFs I had before. And navigating the whole marriage, family, house, picket fence thing does force you to mature as you have to handle more responsibility than you ever thought you could.

 

Cons: Could never resolve or erase the loser-with-women self image that I always had when I was single. And frankly, that's what I wanted most out of marriage.

 

Do it again?: My pros and cons probably cancel each other out, but if I could go back in time, I would definitely tell my grad-student self to be WAY more patient and wait until I was in the real world in my career before panicking, that you actually get to a life stage where everything doesn't revolve around how good you are at bars, parties, and other social gatherings.

[LookAtThisPOst]

Cons: Could never resolve or erase the loser-with-women self image that I always had when I was single. And frankly, that's what I wanted most out of marriage.

 

On this note, I think some people see this as a big plus, because I remember a rather attractive woman who had been married to the same man for 20 years that used to sometimes be the designated driver for some of her single female friends...and the horror stories she's heard when it came to thier dating lives.

 

This is where she says she's VERY thankful for that, as a married woman, would never have to ever put up with again.

[Redhead14]

I was married for 30 years and he was "the one" up to the end. The end was amicable and I still love him in many ways. He is the father of my children and we did shared mostly very good times.

 

After we divorced, I was single for a few years and met a man who was another "the one". We were together for 2 years and engaged for one. He passed away 3 months before our wedding.

 

I am now with my 3rd "the one". We don't plan to marry or even live together for various reasons, but so far we are very happy and see ourselves together for the rest of our lives. I am 57 and he is 63.

 

Each man is/was different in many ways and special in their own right. The things they have in common are that they all treated me with respect, show/showed me every day how much they love me, are/were there for me when I needed them and are/were strong men who appreciated me for my strength.

 

I dated a few other men that I liked very much and one who was almost a "the one" but just wasn't quite right. I could have settled for him, but I'm glad I didn't because with patience and strength and understanding of my needs and the fact that I am perfectly self-sufficient and content with my life on my own, I understood that I didn't have to settle. I don't need a man in my life to be happy. A man doesn't make a woman happy, he only enhances and adds to the happiness she already has. If a person settles, they usually start giving up too much of that already established happiness and "giving up" too much in order to accommodate the "settlement". Yeah, you always need to compromise some and adjust, but you do that almost naturally for the right person. It's not such a conscious effort for the most part. But, if you're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, it ain't gonna work.

[Daisy-oliviaWentcher]

Yes, I did that before. I met a guy who was good looking, treated me like a queen and was normal (hard find today,lol). I was in a vulnerable position at that time and thought why not. There is no reason not to be with him. While he ws crazy in love with me, I never felt that way. I grew to love him, he helped me a lot, I helped him a lot but I was never in love with him. Every time he would initiate sex I was tired, and I genuinely believed that I was just tired.

Then, I met my current bf. He was not even half of what I had in mind (in the looks department) and my first thought was "never gonna happen." He lives in another state and he was persistent to see me. Somehow, I grew to like his personality over the phone and agreed to see him. Needless to say, I fell in love immediately.

 

My best friend has married someone how you've described. She admitted that she got married at 26 because she wanted to get married and never really had a boyfriend before. She wishes she got married earlier, but I think she tries and convinces herself that it is him that she would marry. Later she told me, she would never had married him, he has kids and has been previously married. All her dreams are on hold and she is quite miserable- she loves him, but I don't think she is IN LOVE with him. He is crazy in love with her and LOVES her because she was a virgin when she got married. She now makes up excuses not to sleep with him, and tired being the ultimate excuse. I feel sorry for her, because I know that every time I speak to her, she isn't happy with her life.

[ElizabethIII]

Everyone settles in a relationship to some extent. No one is perfect. There is always going to be something about your partner that you are not 100% happy with.

 

In terms of settling in a big way, my best friend did it. She met this guy and she came home from date 1 saying she didnt really like him. They had nothing to talk about. He REALLY liked her though so she went out again. Had sex with him by date 4 or 5. But she came home from every date saying she was not bothered about him and she was going to have to dump him.

 

She didnt dump him though. She continued to chase who she really did want and he didnt want her. She even cheated on her bf with an ex of hers. She had alot of very significant complaints about this man.

 

After two years of this, she realizes that the one she does want really doesnt want her and that makes her appreciate her boyfriend a bit more. She is hurt that the one she loves doesnt love her and moves in with her 2 year boyfriend saying let's face it, who else am I going to get. I warn her she is in her 20s and there is SO much time to meet someone else and him too as he is also in his 20s and while he may hurt, he will get over it if she ends their relationship.

 

She moves in with him. 11 years later, bringing us to the current date, their marriage is fresh hell. The things she didnt like about him became more intense as he aged. She realized she never really loved him at all. But she cant leave as she has two very young children and worries about joint custody (does not want her kids away from her for long periods) and alimony being enough.

 

After 13 years of this $hit I am sick and I am tired of listening to her. She knew from the first date she didnt like him. I felt bad going to their wedding as I knew how she really felt. And here we are. She has wasted 13 years of her life and of his life and now there are children involved.

Edited November 21, 2016 by ElizabethIII

[basil67]

Everyone settles in a relationship to some extent. No one is perfect. There is always going to be something about your partner that you are not 100% happy with.

 

I don't see this as settling. That's just part of the give and take of a relationship.

 

To me, settling is where there are many things wrong and/or you don't have the love or passion which you'd expect to have....but you don't leave because you think you can't do better.

[thecrucible]

I don't see this as settling. That's just part of the give and take of a relationship.

 

To me, settling is where there are many things wrong and/or you don't have the love or passion which you'd expect to have....but you don't leave because you think you can't do better.

 

I know people who've done this due to complex issues related to health or they don't think they can find anyone better. Personally I'm not one to judge because I'm not walking in their shoes. Sometimes people think they can do better when they're in a relationship but the grass is greener on the other side.

 

I'm single and I worry pretty much every day about who I will date, whether I will get married and what will happen. Life is full of surprises, and not always good ones.

[DK_Casus]

Yes, I believe I've settled in each of my four LTR.

 

I'm a male who just turned 40.

 

Meaning, I've never started out being in love - and now I realise I was more in love with the idea of love than anything else.

 

That said, I believe I grew to love my partners in each case - even if the nature of love might have been different, and of different intensity.

 

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure - as I find it hard to distinguish between love and other kinds of warm feelings over large periods of time. In fact, if we look beyond infatuation, I consider love to be more of a conscious choice based on mutual respect, than something that happens based on chemistry.

 

One bad thing is that I was only truly attracted to one of these partners. Meaning my sex life hasn't been great in the others - and, over time, I've had to make up all kinds of excuses because they wanted sex more than I did.

 

I've only ever been truly in love once - and I didn't get her.

 

Now, I fully believe that being "in love" isn't the end all and be all of having a good relationship. It's my experience with friends and family that the intensity of being in love never really lasts for anyone - with the possible exception of a tiny, tiny minority.

 

So, I've deliberately focused on other values - specifically having things in common and a general appreciation for the person in question.

 

The thing I've obviously missed - and believe it or not - I've only recently figured this out is that sexual attraction needs to be powerful - at least for me.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've always found them SOMEWHAT attractive - and I would never initiate a relationship with a girl I wasn't attracted to - but in 3 out of 4 GFs, it's been a mild attraction - not a strong sexual desire.

 

Now, I've questioned myself as to my sex drive being unusually low - but then I remember how much sex I had with the one GF I was very attracted to. We're talking multiple times a day for a year - even if it did slowly dwindle into much less because of other issues.

 

So, I don't think there's anything wrong with my sex drive as such - I just don't "vote with my eyes" as much as I probably should.

 

I'm just getting started on dating again after a few months since breaking with my last GF (she initiated it, primarily based on a lack of sex) - and I'm going to try and focus on sexual attraction more than I've done in the past.

 

That said, for the most part, I've been quite happy in my relationships - with the exception of one that was really bad, which I won't get into. So, it's not like I've settled because I believed I couldn't get better - I just underestimated the importance of a healthy sex life. I always believed it was something you could "make work" - but obviously I was wrong. It needs to be there from the start.

Edited November 22, 2016 by DK_Casus

[furby19]

So, it's not like I've settled because I believed I couldn't get better - I just underestimated the importance of a healthy sex life. I always believed it was something you could "make work" - but obviously I was wrong. It needs to be there from the start.

 

People's sex drives change over the years. So, just because the sex is plentiful in the beginning does not mean it will continue to be that way. Are you sure that has been the reason why your relationships were failing? You might want to re-evaluate that.

[DK_Casus]

People's sex drives change over the years. So, just because the sex is plentiful in the beginning does not mean it will continue to be that way. Are you sure that has been the reason why your relationships were failing? You might want to re-evaluate that.

 

Why would I be sure about something I didn't say?

 

This was only the primary issue in my last relationship - and it's based on both what I think and what she specifically said. Not so much a lack of sex as her feeling that I wasn't attracted to her enough, which was unfortunately quite true.

 

What I said was that I've never started out being "in love" - and my current reasoning is that it's a bigger deal than I thought it would be. Certainly part of a pattern.

 

Hard to be entirely sure in matters of love, isn't it. It's my experience that my partners had an extremely hard time being totally honest about their reasoning in several areas. In fact, they've seemed almost unaware of what they wanted and why - when it came to the longer term. Their passions ruled and we all suffered. My problem was the reverse - with the mind ruling.

Edited November 24, 2016 by DK_Casus

[Leigh 87]

Yes, I believe I've settled in each of my four LTR.

 

I'm a male who just turned 40.

 

Meaning, I've never started out being in love - and now I realise I was more in love with the idea of love than anything else.

 

That said, I believe I grew to love my partners in each case - even if the nature of love might have been different, and of different intensity.

 

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure - as I find it hard to distinguish between love and other kinds of warm feelings over large periods of time. In fact, if we look beyond infatuation, I consider love to be more of a conscious choice based on mutual respect, than something that happens based on chemistry.

 

One bad thing is that I was only truly attracted to one of these partners. Meaning my sex life hasn't been great in the others - and, over time, I've had to make up all kinds of excuses because they wanted sex more than I did.

 

I've only ever been truly in love once - and I didn't get her.

 

Now, I fully believe that being "in love" isn't the end all and be all of having a good relationship. It's my experience with friends and family that the intensity of being in love never really lasts for anyone - with the possible exception of a tiny, tiny minority.

 

So, I've deliberately focused on other values - specifically having things in common and a general appreciation for the person in question.

 

The thing I've obviously missed - and believe it or not - I've only recently figured this out is that sexual attraction needs to be powerful - at least for me.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've always found them SOMEWHAT attractive - and I would never initiate a relationship with a girl I wasn't attracted to - but in 3 out of 4 GFs, it's been a mild attraction - not a strong sexual desire.

 

Now, I've questioned myself as to my sex drive being unusually low - but then I remember how much sex I had with the one GF I was very attracted to. We're talking multiple times a day for a year - even if it did slowly dwindle into much less because of other issues.

 

So, I don't think there's anything wrong with my sex drive as such - I just don't "vote with my eyes" as much as I probably should.

 

I'm just getting started on dating again after a few months since breaking with my last GF (she initiated it, primarily based on a lack of sex) - and I'm going to try and focus on sexual attraction more than I've done in the past.

 

That said, for the most part, I've been quite happy in my relationships - with the exception of one that was really bad, which I won't get into. So, it's not like I've settled because I believed I couldn't get better - I just underestimated the importance of a healthy sex life. I always believed it was something you could "make work" - but obviously I was wrong. It needs to be there from the start.

 

 

This is exactly how I feel about infatuation and the lack of ability to truly fall in love properly in absence of the infatuation phase.

 

I think it is inportant to fall IN love, with the instant spark and intensity and infatuation, and then to ALSO, after the chemistry dies down, to have enough in common and enough of a genuine connection for us to form a TRUE love.

 

There is falling in love and then is growing to love; giving someone a kidney and having a best friend who is the first person you are busting to tell the best and worst news of your life to-- is ENTIRELY a separate entity to the falling head over heels for soneohe and wanting to ravage them in bed ----- it just so happens that occasionally.... for a tiiiiiiiny proportion of us....... the falling head over heels and magnetic chemistry go hand in hand with a kindered spirit who gets us and we not only can live with, but thrive together with.

[DK_Casus]

This is exactly how I feel about infatuation and the lack of ability to truly fall in love properly in absence of the infatuation phase.

 

I think it is inportant to fall IN love, with the instant spark and intensity and infatuation, and then to ALSO, after the chemistry dies down, to have enough in common and enough of a genuine connection for us to form a TRUE love.

 

There is falling in love and then is growing to love; giving someone a kidney and having a best friend who is the first person you are busting to tell the best and worst news of your life to-- is ENTIRELY a separate entity to the falling head over heels for soneohe and wanting to ravage them in bed ----- it just so happens that occasionally.... for a tiiiiiiiny proportion of us....... the falling head over heels and magnetic chemistry go hand in hand with a kindered spirit who gets us and we not only can live with, but thrive together with.

 

Well, that would be ideal. But it's not like we're in control of falling "in love" - where my postulate is that we have a reasonable degree of control when it comes to "growing love" over time.

 

Also, why would you say the infatuation is vital?

 

If there's sexual attraction and a general appreciation - then why must we be in love?

[Leigh 87]

Well, that would be ideal. But it's not like we're in control of falling "in love" - where my postulate is that we have a reasonable degree of control when it comes to "growing love" over time.

 

Also, why would you say the infatuation is vital?

 

If there's sexual attraction and a general appreciation - then why must we be in love?

 

Because I am not interested or motivated otherwise.

 

I prefer friends with benefits or casual dating to being with someone long term in absence of the spark and falling in love part.

 

The fact is, NOTHING beats falling madly with a person who makes you grin like an idiot and with whom you also can have a deep loving life partnership with, too.

 

For me, falling in love is crucial for having the will to be in a long term relationship. Then again, my parents shipped me off to boarding school at a young age so they could work overseas. I have less of a desire to have a daily companion as it is not what drives me in life. Wanting a partner is a by product of being in love, at least for me.

 

We are all created differently. I am highly sexual and passionate. Without an innate preference for being in a partnership.

 

Where as MOST PEOPLE seek long term companionship, babies and a mortgage. And usually, the drive to have babies before their bio clock dies supersedes holding out for passion and falling in love with a man who wants the same things.

[DK_Casus]

Because I am not interested or motivated otherwise.

 

I prefer friends with benefits or casual dating to being with someone long term in absence of the spark and falling in love part.

 

The fact is, NOTHING beats falling madly with a person who makes you grin like an idiot and with whom you also can have a deep loving life partnership with, too.

 

For me, falling in love is crucial for having the will to be in a long term relationship. Then again, my parents shipped me off to boarding school at a young age so they could work overseas. I have less of a desire to have a daily companion as it is not what drives me in life. Wanting a partner is a by product of being in love, at least for me.

 

We are all created differently. I am highly sexual and passionate. Without an innate preference for being in a partnership.

 

Where as MOST PEOPLE seek long term companionship, babies and a mortgage. And usually, the drive to have babies before their bio clock dies supersedes holding out for passion and falling in love with a man who wants the same things.

 

I don't know if that's what most people seek. Some of it is highly culturally motivated, I'd say, but the "mortgage and baby" package is probably less widespread than you might think.

 

However, I do think wanting permanent love is a universal desire - and I think there's almost no correlation between being "in love" and having love in your life in a permanent fashion.

 

Also, you're not really answering my question.

 

I get that you enjoy mutual infatuation - and who wouldn't

 

But you know it doesn't last - so you should also know you either need to go from person to person - or live without it while you're in a long term relationship after the initial fire has died down.

[salparadise]

I think the word and the concept of "settling" is flawed. Perhaps it's an appropriate concept for those who are extremely superficial, but for people who relate to others as fully-formed, unique, complex human beings... nah, it's just not a good word. To me it always has superficial undertones.

 

Everyone does the best they can based on their own perceived dating equity (ability to attract quality specimens). Some people's perceptions are skewed and they under or overestimate themselves. And then some people just don't assess prospects using the same criteria as most others.

 

I suppose there is such a thing, and taken literally we all do it to some degree, but it's really a simplistic word that seems to ignore and trivialize the uniqueness and complexity of people... like grading people on a 1-10 scale. Ugh.

[DK_Casus]

I think the word and the concept of "settling" is flawed. Perhaps it's an appropriate concept for those who are extremely superficial, but for people who relate to others as fully-formed, unique, complex human beings... nah, it's just not a good word. To me it always has superficial undertones.

 

Everyone does the best they can based on their own perceived dating equity (ability to attract quality specimens). Some people's perceptions are skewed and they under or overestimate themselves. And then some people just don't assess prospects using the same criteria as most others.

 

I suppose there is such a thing, and taken literally we all do it to some degree, but it's really a simplistic word that seems to ignore and trivialize the uniqueness and complexity of people... like grading people on a 1-10 scale. Ugh.

 

Yet it's a convenient short-hand for something we all understand - even if there are degrees of settling where it's not what most would consider settling.

[LookAtThisPOst]

I sometimes wonder if people will settle if they lived in an area that lacked single people in their age demographic? Let's say ages 30s to 40s, single...but most of his/her friends are married with children...and well, a single guy/gal will occasionally meander into town due to job/career move.

 

If that single/gal didn't fill in your entire list of dating criteria, would you give them a shot?

 

I think the word and the concept of "settling" is flawed. Perhaps it's an appropriate concept for those who are extremely superficial

 

It's kind of a sugar coated word or euphemism to make others that use it sound less shallow. Let's say she's only 5'1", but won't date someone under 6 feet, but if she does it's "settling"?

 

Yet it's a convenient short-hand for something we all understand - even if there are degrees of settling where it's not what most would consider settling.

 

Right, people have their OWN definition of the word. When I see these dating profiles that say, "I know what I want and I won't settle" it makes me want to ask them "Define settling, please?"

Edited November 24, 2016 by LookAtThisPOst

[Eternal Sunshine]

For me, settling is equal to entering into a relationship without the infatuation phase. I find it very painful to even go on dates that are "pleasant" and have "good conversation" without that desire to rip someone's clothes off. I have no motivation to even put on mascara without that desire.

 

Now having a relationship last, is much more than that attraction. But it has to be there for me to even get to the next stage, and not just mild attraction either. That type of passionate attraction/chemistry never really goes away, even when the relationship settles. Sure, the frequency of sex may die down but I believe it's that irrational glue that makes you get through many obstacles together. I can sense people's energy and when long term couples have "that" you can see them kind of light up from inside when they are close.

 

There are many different types of love. I feel very strong love for my parents or my pets. I have also been in one LTR without that strong passion. We had tons in common and a very strong intellectual connection. I did grow attached to that partner in time but I can compare the love that I felt for him more to non-romantic types of love (despite a pleasant sex life). And I believe that my discontent through that relationship stemmed purely from that lack of strong passion. It's incredibly hard to find it all. I get it. It's also incredibly hard to be alone. Many people can't and "settle" and are happy enough in companionship based LTRs. It's not for me.

 

I am willing to accept practical differences such as age, having children or geographical location. But very strong passion coupled with intellectual/emotional connection is all a must. I need to be blown away. I would rather wait forever than accept anything else.

[DK_Casus]

For me, settling is equal to entering into a relationship without the infatuation phase. I find it very painful to even go on dates that are "pleasant" and have "good conversation" without that desire to rip someone's clothes off. I have no motivation to even put on mascara without that desire.

 

Now having a relationship last, is much more than that attraction. But it has to be there for me to even get to the next stage, and not just mild attraction either. That type of passionate attraction/chemistry never really goes away, even when the relationship settles. Sure, the frequency of sex may die down but I believe it's that irrational glue that makes you get through many obstacles together. I can sense people's energy and when long term couples have "that" you can see them kind of light up from inside when they are close.

 

There are many different types of love. I feel very strong love for my parents or my pets. I have also been in one LTR without that strong passion. We had tons in common and a very strong intellectual connection. I did grow attached to that partner in time but I can compare the love that I felt for him more to non-romantic types of love (despite a pleasant sex life). And I believe that my discontent through that relationship stemmed purely from that lack of strong passion. It's incredibly hard to find it all. I get it. It's also incredibly hard to be alone. Many people can't and "settle" and are happy enough in companionship based LTRs. It's not for me.

 

I am willing to accept practical differences such as age, having children or geographical location. But very strong passion coupled with intellectual/emotional connection is all a must. I need to be blown away. I would rather wait forever than accept anything else.

 

I get what you're saying - and yet even with the infatuation, none of your relationships have lasted.

 

Why, exactly, don't you think lasting love is worthwhile if that initial phase is absent?

 

I'm not trying to be snarky - I'm genuinely curious.

 

Because if the infatuation is the key - then why even bother with LTR? Why not just go from partner to partner in tune with the infatuation cycle?

[phineas]

Yes! Only not just one person but several.

 

So every man that I have ended up in a long term relationship with has been a variation of the same man hahahah. They all shared similar traits and characteristics that appealed to me. All the men that I dated in between those either didn't have enough of the characteristics that make me want to fall in love with them or didn't appeal in some significant way.

 

In other words, I've fallen completely in love with each of the guys that I ended up in an LTR with, therefore I never settled. If I didn't fall in love then I would end it because it meant something was missing.

 

And why did those relationships end?

I have women friends who claim "I won't settle" then continually date the same guy.

Selfish

controlling

abusive

treats them like a bag of dogfood

narcissists basically.

out of shape

bad hygiene.

 

Basically they end up in love with the WORST of the male population available and end up alone for long amounts of time.

 

meanwhile every decent guy who has a great job, lifts, in shape, good looking, would treat them well...they have zero interest in.

[salparadise]

For me, settling is equal to entering into a relationship without the infatuation phase. I find it very painful to even go on dates that are "pleasant" and have "good conversation" without that desire to rip someone's clothes off. I have no motivation to even put on mascara without that desire.

 

Yes, and others may say it's settling if you marry someone because of the infatuation and lust, even though they don't have your family's social status and wealth. Some may say it's marrying someone with kids from a prior marriage.

 

I'm infatuated with Jennifer Connelly. Does that mean I'd be settling if I dated/married someone who I've met in person, and who knows I exist?

 

It just doesn't seem like a valid concept to me when basically everyone does it, depending on how you define it.

[DK_Casus]

Yes, and others may say it's settling if you marry someone because of the infatuation and lust, even though they don't have your family's social status and wealth. Some may say it's marrying someone with kids from a prior marriage.

 

I'm infatuated with Jennifer Connelly. Does that mean I'd be settling if I dated/married someone who I've met in person, and who knows I exist?

 

It just doesn't seem like a valid concept to me when basically everyone does it, depending on how you define it.

 

You're saying we need to use the same definition for the concept to exist and be valid?

 

If someone feels he or she has settled, then he or she has settled.

 

It doesn't mean you would have settled in that same situation - and using the word doesn't preclude going into detail about how and why.

 

As for your Jennifer Connelly example, I don't follow. If you're infatuated with one person - famous or not - why couldn't you be infatuated with another person?

 

Again, it's highly subjective - true - but it's definitely a real thing.

[GunslingerRoland]

I've never settled on things that were important to me and never would.

 

That said I don't have a checklist of superficial things that I ever expected a woman to meet up to. I never had an expected height range, or color, or religion, or list of hobbies, or anything that I specifically expected.

 

My must haves were someone that I was attracted to, that had good values, and that I enjoyed being with.

 

Don't get caught up in the minutia of details. If you meet someone who makes you happy and they weigh 15 extra pounds, are 3 inches too short, 4 years too old, or have horrible taste in music, it will NOT affect your happiness and ability to have a great life together. I think a lot of people forget that in this era of checklist online dating.

[JuneJulySeptember]

Has anyone on here ever settled in a relationship? Would you ever recommend settling?

 

If you're happy, then you're not settling. If you're happier with that person than being alone, then you're not settling.

 

Is there something better out there that you can get? Perhaps. But now you're toeing the line of coulda-beens in life. People can leave their jobs, spouses, and kids because they feel they can be happier working in a travelling circus. Whether it is so, is another case.

 

In a traditional sense, 'settling' is a concept used by others to make them feel better about themselves.

 

"Joanie is pretty, why is she going out with that short/unattractive guy. I wouldn't settle like that."

 

"Joanie makes so much money, why is she going out with that 3rd grade teacher. I wouldn't settle like that."

 

That doesn't mean that person settled. That just means you are a d@uchebag for saying it.

[Grey40]

Settling is such s subjective thing, everyone will have a different answer. I think every relationship requires both people to compromise and be accepting of things. There's no one out there you will meet who will be perfect and cross off every single check mark you're looking for. To me, you are only settling if the biggest things that matter to you in the opposite sex are not being met.

 

For instance, if a fit body is something that is really important for the person to have and they are slightly overweight or don't make attempts to work on it, then you are settling.

 

If the opposite sex is attractivr but you care more about them being kind and considerate and they don't treat you with respect all the time, then you're settling in that category.

 

So essentially, if something is a huge deal for you (a deal breaker) and you're putting up with it, to some degree you are settling.