Do you check out your love before you take the plunge?

[soccorsilly]

A viscous thread ensued on this topic elsewhere and I just want to see if I am f'd up or the other party is f'd up?

 

If you meet someone that you are dating and beginning to get serious. In love. You may be thinking marriage, or just a long term thing. Considering moving in together, the whole drill.

 

Do you go with the feelings opinions that have developed over the "courtship" and go with your heart......

 

Or...

 

Do you check them out? I mean we all google one another, but do you take it further--background check, credit report, or perhaps a private investigator?

[Rosalind]

Originally posted by soccorsilly

Do you check them out? I mean we all google one another, but do you take it further--background check, credit report, or perhaps a private investigator?

No

[A Fly onThe Wall]

Great post soccorsilly ..

 

NO !!

 

I think there is a place for background checks as in .. employment. or divorces ( someone hiding assets )

 

But they have no place in an active growing relationship ..

[Merin]

No I wouldn't do a background check, hire a PI, or run a credit check..

[Naive]

I definitely would not do a background check!!! Why would you want to get serious with someone you do not trust?

[A Fly onThe Wall]

If you don't trust 'em why would you even date 'em ?

[Thinkalot]

No. wouldnt even think of it

[Kat]

I do the simple test. If my parents like the guy, then they are okay in my books.

 

My parents have NEVER been wrong before

[Thinkalot]

Parents can be overprotective and quick to judge sometimes...the parent test probably depends on the parents!

[Kat]

Originally posted by Thinkalot

Parents can be overprotective and quick to judge sometimes...the parent test probably depends on the parents!

 

Very true. My parents however have been right with every single man I have ever been with and previously I refused to listen to them as "They didn't understand" because "I loved him" *gag*

 

This one didn't try to kill any of my siblings and has the love of both my parents. If my parents hadn't liked him, I wouldn't be with him.

[RecordProducer]

No.

 

But I think sam... errr... some people should hire a PI to check on them while they are in their other personalities' mode!

[Marshbear]

Originally posted by RecordProducer

But I think sam... errr... some people should hire a PI to check on them while they are in their other personalities' mode!

 

[Craig]

Soccorsilly, it isn't a matter of being f'd up or not, it is simply a matter of choice.

 

Advertisements encourage people to have STD checkups before having unprotected sex. Parents, some parents tell their children how to tell is a potential mate is of good character. People give their opinions about their friends choices in dating material. People already check out their potential mates but they do it in an unorganized fashion, with no experience, little knowledge, lots of ignorance and base months or years of their life on an evaluation that isn't worth anything at all.

 

Someone brings up the idea of checking out a potential mate and somehow that is seen by others as a violation of something sacred. LS is filled with people, whom had they known what they could have found out with a background check, etc. would have been spared a lot of pain and might not be on LS as a result.

 

Personally, I would be thrilled if a potential mate had me checked out. To me it would show that she is serious and responsible. I wouldn't mind and in fact would encourage the full range of investigations into my past, finances, stability, character and etc.

 

Wouldn't it be a different world if as a matter of course people took more care in selecting a mate then they do now?

[RecordProducer]

Originally posted by Marshbear

 

Marshbear, if you want to know what I am talking about and want to have some fun along, visit pages 8, 9 and 10 of my thread.

http://www.loveshack.org/forums/t66184/15-8?highlight=

Enjoy yourself!

[A Fly onThe Wall]

Originally posted by Craig

Wouldn't it be a different world if as a matter of course people took more care in selecting a mate then they do now?

 

Interesting take on it craig .. So you think that it doesn't have to do with distrust but more along the line of being responsible ? Hummm that is a good approach really

[RecordProducer]

Originally posted by Craig

 

Personally, I would be thrilled if a potential mate had me checked out. To me it would show that she is serious and responsible. I wouldn't mind and in fact would encourage the full range of investigations into my past, finances, stability, character and etc.

 

So if you were involved with someone for a few months and have told them everything about yourself and after that they checked on you to see if you're married, have kids, whether you are who you say you are, have a criminal record, what's your real name, etc... you would actually think "Oh, cool! I am glad you didn't trust me!"

[Outcast]

I think that people being checked on shouldn't take it personally. It is understandable that a person won't trust you - how can they? You trust people because they have proven to be trustworthy but you can't afford the several years it takes to figure out if someone is all they say they are.

 

Files of police departments are littered with cases of someone having trusted somebody they should never have trusted and we all know that - we read about them in the papers. I agree with Craig - if you have nothing to hide, you should be completely unafraid of being checked out.

 

Why, really, should anybody trust you? Maybe you know you are trustworthy, but people who are not you don't know what's in your head. So checking up is fine.

 

I do warn people before they check on me that I have the same name as a criminal who has posted quite a bit from jail!

[Craig]

Originally posted by RecordProducer

So if you were involved with someone for a few months and have told them everything about yourself and after that they checked on you to see if you're married, have kids, whether you are who you say you are, have a criminal record, what's your real name, etc... you would actually think "Oh, cool! I am glad you didn't trust me!"

RP I would not think "Oh, cool! I am glad you didn't trust me!" I would think that the person checking me out is being responsible and thoughtful and I would take no offense. I have nothing to hide, I have made mistakes, learned and grown from them and I would expect that I would have the foresight to disclose those things to a potential life mate that would be important for them to know. I, as most people, am not skilled or experienced in accurately judging a person. Overtime we can learn all we need to about a person but rather than waste 5 or 10 years in a relationship that will ultimately go nowhere it makes sense to me for my sig. other to "check me out" and end a relationship with me if she can't live with who I am in all aspects.

 

LS is rife with women complaining about their sig. others watching porn, men and women being cheated on by serial cheaters, women and men shocked at learning that their sig. other is not whom they thought they were when they got married, men and women who are dumped by their sig. others a day after the dumper professes their undying eternal love to the dumpee, etc. Many of these people trusted their gut, listened to their parents and so on and wound up losing in love.

 

I would much rather be with a woman that is honest enough to know that she might be fooled or that she might be blinded by "love" to a potential relationship killing trait of mine and have me checked out than a woman who, while in the throws of love is blind to what later becomes obvious, throws caution to the wind and jumps into a relationship with me only to dump me years from now.

 

I am strong enough to be myself and ask only that any woman that falls in love with me is strong enough to get to know me before we make a serious long term commitment to each other.

[loony]

Maybe I'm naive, but I don't invest feelings in a person that I don't consider to be trustworthy. I'm also not interested in people who have problems with the law, are alcoholics, use drugs, are financially irresponsible, stupid, liars, etc. I check them out all the time. And I try to do this before I fall in love with them (unfortunately, I'm not always successful and sometimes you still fall in love with people who are bad matches for you, nonetheless, for none of their flaws would it have been necessary to make a background check, they were all in fact quite visible).

[soccorsilly]

This is interssting and surprising to me. Craig, you make some valid points (in my view), but I guess I am of the old school in that you meet someone and there is some intrigue and your trust is built over a period of time till it turns to love (that may be 2 weeks or it may be several years).

 

From what I read here, the love problems you mentioned--porn, cheating, video games, flirting with other people, etc. are all items that probably would not be uncovered in any event--unless there was a constant surveillance or something like that.

 

But I feel that you go with your instincts (similar to Kat's parents) and usually--not always but usually they are right on. That is not to say that something won't de-rail it alond the way, but they are usually right on. I think if you look at the number of people that are in successful relationships or relationships that have merely fallen apart, are much more prevalent than those that are torn apart by hidden criminal histories, serial killers, and even porn mavens.

 

Now if my trust was broken and there seemed to be a reason to check someone out--totally different story. We are talking about the routine here.

 

I also feel very similar about pre-nuptual agreements. It is almost like planning to fail.

[Pendawn]

I tihnk I would only feel the need to check someone out if they seemed to be hiding stuff from me, eg if I never got to meet/see their family or friends, ifthey never had you round to their home, or only called you etc. But that would be before I got serious, because that behaviour would make me question everything.

 

The first month or so i started dating my bf I checked him out in so far as i made sure to go round to his house, called his house, read a forum he said he posted on. Everything he said was backed up by this so I trusted him and stopped any kind of "checking" after about 6 weeks.

 

If I'm at the stage where I'm conisdering marrying someone I would expect to know the state of their finances and enough about thier history (including form thier family nad friends) that a background ro credit check would be wasted. And a Pi would be a waste as at that point I'd expect our lives to be pretty meshed so I'd know generally what they were up to 9eg calling them at work occassionally for innocent reasons, would show they're job is real. Chatting to thier friends/friends partners and knowing they are really seeing their friends when they say etc etc).

[Craig]

Originally posted by soccorsilly

From what I read here, the love problems you mentioned--porn, cheating, video games, flirting with other people, etc. are all items that probably would not be uncovered in any event--unless there was a constant surveillance or something like that.

A porn and video game problem might be uncovered by a PI's look at credit card statements. Other challenges in a prospective SO's character might be uncovered via discrete undercover interviews with friends, associates, past SO's, web sites regularly visited, cell phone, landline records and etc. What a competent PI can uncover in a very short time is staggering.

 

I understand and accept the differences in points of view that people have. Generally speaking there is the implied trust group, where trust is accepted and given after a relatively short period of time--a time when partners are typically on their best behavior and actively working to earn each others trust. The other group acknowledges that they do not have the skills, clarity of perception or reliable third party confirmation of their prospective SO’s character and wanting to have a lasting relationship free of relationship killing surprises have their SO checked out.

 

But why the difference? The simplest explanation I can see is money. It costs money to check out a prospective SO. Not having your SO checked out has always been the low cost way to go. Most people don’t think they have the money to have their SO checked out. Humans needing to rationalize their decisions tell themselves that checking out a SO is somehow a violation of the trust in the relationship and not because they can’t see themselves spending the money to get their prospective SO checked out. The result is the thought pattern becomes a part of mainstream culture and accepted as “common sense.” For those people who have been hurt or seen others hurt or have money, checking out a prospective SO becomes less of an issue of trust and more an issue of self protection, personal responsibility AND responsibility to the relationship.

[quankanne]

Do you check them out?

 

hee hee ... like Kat, I submit them to the "family test." If they can handle my two over-the-top sisters (and NOT fall in love with the younger of the two), he's a keeper.

 

the only time I'd do a thorough search is if the little bits of information that he's shared about himself don't add up. I'm not interested in being partnered with a pathological liar, so I wouldn't have qualms about checking him out if the relationship were headed into seriously committed territory.

[loony]

Does anyone really believe it's so hard to figure out if someone is a pathological liar or not? To require a background check, I mean.

[Outcast]

Does anyone really believe it's so hard to figure out if someone is a pathological liar or not? To require a background check, I mean.

 

Yes. I read a story from one of the universities that said that people are terrible at detecting lies. Some policemen and customs people who have been trained to look for signs are a bit better, but mostly people aren't nearly as good at figuring out lthat somebody is lying as they think they are. Would LoveShack be around if people always knew they were being lied to?