Lil Honey Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 That's why the last three qualities (looks, sexual skill, and life experiences) were "should haves" and not "must haves". They are more optional. The real deal-breakers are the first seven. Well, I wasn't referring to your list specifically. The qualities I mentioned were for making a point only. And 5'11" is tall enough. My point was that some women would throw a good man aside because she couldn't/wouldn't see past some trait that really wasn't important in the grand scheme of things. Again, I wasn't speaking at you specifically, only using some of what you said to expand on. What's wrong with setting a few standards? Nothing is wrong with it. I didn't say there was. I said that flexibility is a good idea. I have standards, too, but those standards steer me in a direction that automatically puts me in situations that leave some people out and include others. *shrugging* What's the use of wandering around the dating world aimlessly? I didnt' suggest that. They are just ten qualities! Ten qualities cannot possibly encompass human perfection. They are just the ten that I seem to seek out actively. Okay. * * * Edited to add: The thing is, finding someone is a matter of chemistry AND luck. There are very few people who will have the chemistry fit with another person AND fewer (probably) who that person will be lucky enough to run into and meet. Yet, folks seem to think that the odds are a lot better.
BlahBlahQueen Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 My point was that some women would throw a good man aside because she couldn't/wouldn't see past some trait that really wasn't important in the grand scheme of things... flexibility is a good idea. I have standards, too, but those standards steer me in a direction that automatically puts me in situations that leave some people out and include others. You are right, and maybe I was over-emphasizing some sort of Nazi approach. No, agreed, you have to make special exceptions sometimes. But they better be damn good On a dumb note, let me clarify that the looks and sexual prowess lists I made include all the things I find desirable, but I will generally find a guy fairly hot if he has even half of those traits. For example, I can deal with a guy who has a misshapen nose and is short, as long as he has the green eyes and angular bone structure. Et cetera. Damn, I'm all about the pontification today. Sorry.
Author CaliGuy Posted January 18, 2006 Author Posted January 18, 2006 Edited to add: The thing is, finding someone is a matter of chemistry AND luck. There are very few people who will have the chemistry fit with another person AND fewer (probably) who that person will be lucky enough to run into and meet. Yet, folks seem to think that the odds are a lot better. Agreed. I've been on several dates lately and there's been no chemistry, at least nothing like what the ex and I had. I think once you've had chemistry that powerful, it's like a drug. And you will continue to go through date after date until you find it. I've only had that kind of chemistry once or twice in my life. I'm not sure if I'll ever get lucky enough to have it again.
Yamaha Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 Agreed. I've been on several dates lately and there's been no chemistry, at least nothing like what the ex and I had. I think once you've had chemistry that powerful, it's like a drug. And you will continue to go through date after date until you find it. I've only had that kind of chemistry once or twice in my life. I'm not sure if I'll ever get lucky enough to have it again. Chemistry is rare and if you find it you better think hard before throwing it away. It may not be within your criteria but it is undeniable just the same.
Lil Honey Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 Chemistry is rare and if you find it you better think hard before throwing it away. It may not be within your criteria but it is undeniable just the same. This is really a great point. So many women and men swoon over a hot models, but it is superficial lust. That's why it's so important to get to know someone. Chemistry might not present itself in the physical sense.
Author CaliGuy Posted January 18, 2006 Author Posted January 18, 2006 Chemistry is rare and if you find it you better think hard before throwing it away. It may not be within your criteria but it is undeniable just the same. The ex and I had strong chemistry, but that wained for her when I was being too soft and clingy. Had I just stayed true to myself we'd probably still be together. She's the one who ended it, not me.
Mz. Pixie Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 The ex and I had strong chemistry, but that wained for her when I was being too soft and clingy. Had I just stayed true to myself we'd probably still be together. She's the one who ended it, not me. Perhaps it wasn't about you and it was about her?? You ever think about that? You cannot force someone to stay with someone. If she left it wasn't meant to be, it could have not had anything to do with you being too soft and clingy.
Author CaliGuy Posted January 18, 2006 Author Posted January 18, 2006 Perhaps it wasn't about you and it was about her?? You ever think about that? Yes, she had issues too. She's far from perfect. You cannot force someone to stay with someone. If she left it wasn't meant to be, it could have not had anything to do with you being too soft and clingy. A lot of it had to do with my own personal insecurities and she pointed that out. She flat out told me I was "soft and clingy." She's always been blunt and honest in regards to us. She gave me many reasons why it wasn't working out, being soft and clingy was probably the #1 reason. I take responsibility for myself and my own actions. I can't control her. I knew a few months into the relationship that something was wrong but I chose to ignore it. Now I am paying the price. But I won't let that happen again. The next time that little voice sets off an alarm, I'll listen to it.
blind_otter Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 Yes, she had issues too. She's far from perfect. A lot of it had to do with my own personal insecurities and she pointed that out. She flat out told me I was "soft and clingy." She's always been blunt and honest in regards to us. She gave me many reasons why it wasn't working out, being soft and clingy was probably the #1 reason. I take responsibility for myself and my own actions. I can't control her. I knew a few months into the relationship that something was wrong but I chose to ignore it. Now I am paying the price. But I won't let that happen again. The next time that little voice sets off an alarm, I'll listen to it. So now all women are identical to your ex? How does that make sense? One woman said "XYZ" therefore all women will say "XYZ" I dated an abusive a**h*** last year who wasn't soft and clingy at all. After getting smacked around enough, you kinda WANT soft and clingy. Hard, cold, and distant reminds me of things I'd rather forget.
alphamale Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 I dated an abusive a**h*** last year who wasn't soft and clingy at all. But this was your choice...we must all take responsiblity for our decisions.
Author CaliGuy Posted January 18, 2006 Author Posted January 18, 2006 So now all women are identical to your ex? Never said that. I feel very hard for this girl, more so than anyone else in my life. What I stated needs to be taken in context. How does that make sense? One woman said "XYZ" therefore all women will say "XYZ" Never meant to infer that at all. I dated an abusive a**h*** last year who wasn't soft and clingy at all. After getting smacked around enough, you kinda WANT soft and clingy. Hard, cold, and distant reminds me of things I'd rather forget. If you can find someone for me that made me have crazy butterflies like my ex did, I probably would be a bit of what I was with her, but having learned my lesson I know that love is a dance and no one partner should do all the leading or all the following.
blind_otter Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 But this was your choice...we must all take responsiblity for our decisions. Well duh, I already have. But, that said, I still don't like distant men who make themselves exceedingly unavailable. Hey, do you remember that guy - ConfusedinOC - he was all about learning how to be rougher and tougher. But honestly, I think if it's not how the guy naturally is than he can work on being someone else for the rest of his life and it'll still come off as fake and unauthentic...
Lil Honey Posted January 18, 2006 Posted January 18, 2006 Like I said . . . it's a crapshoot. A person can try all they want to be attractive to a larger number of the opposite sex, but they aren't being themselves and if the chemistry and luck aren't in alignment, it isn't going to work. It must be such a waste of time and energy to be sure that your boobs are squished enough into your sweater or to be sure that you're "macho" enough. Why not just be a productive member of society and let someone notice you doing what you are good at - or doing something relatively important? Afterall, if you are looking for a long-term relationship, is the shape of your boobs or your macho persona going to get you through the hard times and are they going to matter when you both are in your 80s? Edited to add: Chemistry and someone's attraction to you is an individual thing, not a personal thing. (If THAT makes sense.) So, folks shouldn't take it personally if another doesn't find them attractive. They shouldn't get down on themselves and feel that they are (necessarily) doing something "wrong."
csfong007 Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 #1 BIG giving and forgiving heart #2 generous #3 honest #4 sincere #5 intelligent #6 sense of humor #7 positive attitude #8 hardworking #9 treats me well #10 chemistry This was fun. Thanks for asking. There is no real order, although for me, the BIG HEART is definitely #1. I'm very fortunate in that my boyfriend has a very big giving and forgiving heart...I don't know what I'd do if he didn't.
Recommended Posts