Dealbreakers

[Chinook]

Second, he says he would prefer to be with someone who's been through hardships, because they build character, and you act like he's molesting children in wheelchairs.

 

I just don't get it.

 

The point is that you're with someone for who they are... not what they have or have not been through. Just because someone hasn't been through the sh*te that I and others have, does not mean they do not understand life. It does not mean that they have no character or respect for other people. That is the point. Similarly, people who have been through a hard time are not always good people either. I've come across people who have supposedly been "humbled" by life and they've fought back by lashing out at anyone and everyone. Having experienced sh*te in your life does not make you a good/bad person... that is something inherent in your personality and your upbringing.

[Chinook]

This is my last post on this thread because I really don't feel I can objectively offer any more viewpoint. I wish the OP luck with his search.

[TheSilentType]

I agree that not all tragedy or hardship is easy to overcome. But I also think many tragedies can be overcome, partly depending on the person.

 

Some people, when faced with unfortunate situations that are thrust on them, muster the courage to rise up to the situation and bravely deal with their life. I have admiration for these people, and yes I do feel that the pain they undergo helps build character and substance.

 

Take for example, the people who grew up in the Depression. Growing up under such poverty, do you think those people did not learn the value of a dollar and to appreciate what little they had in life? Personally, I feel that that generation of people were a much more hardier and humbler group than the people you find today.

 

Here's another example. Take someone from a poor family who had to give up higher education to work and support their family after a parent died. That takes a lot of courage and shows a lot of integrity in my opinion. I could see myself being involved with someone like that, even though they are not educated, because they have a good character and show signs of more evolved people, such as sacrificing your own happiness for that of others.

 

I hope this gives you a sense of why I wrote that in the list.

[TheSilentType]

This is my last post on this thread because I really don't feel I can objectively offer any more viewpoint. I wish the OP luck with his search.

 

Well thanks for stopping by and offering your views.

 

And yes, I hope I do get lucky with my search. But I bet I might have to re-evaluate some of my dealbreakers as time goes on. Except for the one about getting involved with a girl who has had a lot of partners. That one stays.

[Pink Amulet]

Did you know that cancer patients have a higher rate [Risk] of suicide than cure..?

 

 

 

Seriously?

[burning 4 revenge]

ST, a girl who's had a lot of partners is far more likely to be unfaithful, or leave you for the next pretty boy who'll take her. I don't care what these girls say. There's a reason for the social stigma.

[TheSilentType]

ST, a girl who's had a lot of partners is far more likely to be unfaithful, or leave you for the next pretty boy who'll take her. I don't care what these girls say. There's a reason for the social stigma.

 

Yes, to some extent I feel like they'll always want the chase

[burning 4 revenge]

Yes, to some extent I feel like they'll always want the chase

Man, you don't know how right you are

[Vertex]

Hardship is a two-way street. Some people take their own hardships the wrong way. Someone living in the Depression, for instance, could indeed develop a strong sense of character and learn how to be smarter with money after living through a difficult struggle of financial drought. However, it can also instill a sense of entitlement in that same person. People may constantly throw their hardships in your face in order to guilt you or make you feel as if they are constantly owed something. My mother has done this -- instead of becoming a stronger, wiser person as a result of my father's/her husband's death, she uses the death as a way to gain sympathy or to be excused from the simplest of things to the point of it being ridiculous. Obviously, such traits are not what you'd want in a partner.

 

It should also tell you that strong, desirable traits can be developed with or without hardship -- hardships are simply difficult, unfortunate circumstances. My life's been full of them (I'm 19, even), but I am still far from perfect. Many people have large stressors in life and I don't think there is any sort of objective indicator as to whether or not one person's had it worse than another, or if someone's traits are strong as a result of hardship or weak because of a lack of hardship, etc, because all such things are so interexchangable. As stated earlier, if it's hard for you, then it's hard. Seeking out people who've experienced death or poverty or rape is not exactly the healthiest way to go about looking for an ideal component in another human being.

 

The beauty of human interaction is that the causal factors and resultative elements are so fluid. People can have all sorts of traits and yet possess a myriad of differences in terms of how their lives have played out so far. You should simply search for what the other person's traits are like in the present -- you should look to the RESULTS -- not the causal factors -- to determine if someone's right for you.

 

Your desire to find someone who understands the importance of earning and not freeloading is a totally valid one. Reading through this thread, I think your "dealbreakers" are grounded in the wrong way but have valid ideas if you reword them. For instance, if a girl has had 20 partners, but is the absolute love of your life, and never cheats, provides you great happiness, has an engaging mind, etc, then would you still reject her based on her past? Again -- focus on the way people have BECOME. Not on hollow assumptions derived from a limited knowledge of a history.

[TheSilentType]

IMO, the measure of a person is how they react to life when it does not go their way.

 

People who have faced hardship AND managed to deal with it constructively have proven themselves worthy in my book.

 

Why would I want to marry some princess who has gone her entire life with a sense of entitlement? Why would I want to deal with someone who has had an otherwise pretty charmed life?

 

I want to be with someone who has been tested, and perhaps tested often, and who came out of that a better person. I know there are people who crumble when faced with hardship. It is unfortunate, but I don't want to be with them. I would rather be with someone who faced harsh reality and marched on.

[Vertex]

Again, you will only limit yourself by searching for that rather specific and inherently unreasonable combination. Instead of saying something like "I don't want a girl that's slept with 30 people because a higher number is indicative of an undesirable trait," it should rather be reworded as "I don't like this undesirable trait in ITSELF." A past simply cannot paint a clear picture of the present. Would you reject someone who has good traits but no hardships in favor of someone with those very same traits but with hardship? The past history and the present character traits can be totally different things. Why not seek the traits and let the past rest in this sense?

[lindya]

People who have come through such hardships do so because they have to... the choice is, there is no choice. It has nothing to do with building character or humbling them. It happens because sh*t happens. It doesn't make you a better or bigger person. It simply makes you different from who you were. I am not a person because of the sh*te I've been through. Cancer does not define me. I am the person I am because I am me... not a label or an experience.

 

Your post was spectacular, Chinook.

 

I can see why someone who has come through the things you described would have little patience with the notion that a person should have to go through great pain and suffering in order to "prove their worth". Whether the choice is to view the woman as a victim or as a survivor, that choice still requires one thing.....that this person should have suffered terribly.

 

The idea that anyone would want painful memories and PTSD to be complicating the life of the person they fall in love with is something I also find strange. You love people despite the scars and baggage that trauma leaves...not because of them.

 

I guess ST could argue that he's looking for someone who managed to emerge from serious difficulties without any emotional hangovers. I'd love it if any experienced psychologists who happen to read the board could comment further on the feasibility of that.

 

Boy. Cinderella really does have a lot to answer for.

[stoopid_guy]

First, he says he does'nt like whores and everyone has an epileptic seizure. I've been burned by a whore, so I know exactly where he's coming from. Use and abuse ST, don't be the victim.

 

I think it's the "Has had many male sexual partners" and then the "Use, abuse, and then dump" if they have that caused the reactions. First; how many is too many? Two a year? Five a year? Ten a year? and second; it's a bit hypocritical to say it's not OK for girls to use guys sexually, but OK for him to use them sexually.

 

I was thinking more about "dealbreakers." Specific things that caused split-ups for me in the past;

 

1) A woman went to a party with me and left with another guy.

 

2) One was too religious, actually wanted me to get baptised and join her church, and I just couldn't take vows I didn't take seriously.

 

3) One was married. (She told me after we'd been involved for a few months. Her husband travelled a lot so it was fairly easy for her.)

 

4) One was extremely jealous.

 

5) One was way too clingy and pushed too fast.

 

6) My wife is un-affectionate, has been that way for years now, and I don't think it'll last.

[TheSilentType]

 

I can see why someone who has come through the things you described would have little patience with the notion that a person should have to go through great pain and suffering in order to "prove their worth". Whether the choice is to view the woman as a victim or as a survivor, that choice still requires one thing.....that this person should have suffered terribly.

 

The idea that anyone would want painful memories and PTSD to be complicating the life of the person they fall in love with is something I also find strange. You love people despite the scars and baggage that trauma leaves...not because of them.

 

Boy. Cinderella really does have a lot to answer for.

 

Ugh! Neither you or Chinook understand where I am coming from!

 

I'm not looking for some scarred person who has PTSD. I'm looking for someone who accepted the unfortunate incident in their life and bravely found a way to cope and move on.

 

For example, look at Paul McCartney's soon-to-be ex-wife. She lost a leg in an accident. That's a pretty rough thing to experience. But rather than just sit around and waste her life crying over her missing leg, she channeled her efforts to raise awareness about landmines. That's something I respect and admire, and I'm sure Paul McCartney found that endearing as well.

 

I'm not on a mission to find trainwrecks or anything like that. But I don't want someone whose had a sheltered life. I want someone whose gone through a trial by fire, and came out a stronger, more humble, or more compassionate person.

[lindya]

Ugh! Neither you or Chinook understand where I am coming from!

 

You can "Ugh" all you like...but it's pretty evident that you're coming from the perspective of a rather immature 24 year old.

 

I'm not looking for some scarred person who has PTSD. I'm looking for someone who accepted the unfortunate incident in their life and bravely found a way to cope and move on.

 

Pehaps you should read up about PTSD. Its effects often hit the seemingly strongest and bravest of individuals (and their families) when they least expect it.

 

You're romanticising the idea of "going through tough times". 100% acceptance of traumatic incidents....is there such a thing? People learn to cope, and they often do so with the aid of strong people around them who see (and have the ability to accept) those weaker, less attractive and less courageous elements that can come out in private.

 

For example, look at Paul McCartney's soon-to-be ex-wife. She lost a leg in an accident. That's a pretty rough thing to experience. But rather than just sit around and waste her life crying over her missing leg, she channeled her efforts to raise awareness about landmines. That's something I respect and admire, and I'm sure Paul McCartney found that endearing as well.

 

Celebrities have teams of publicists and advisors behind them. I'm not suggesting that Heather Mills isn't a strong and admirable character, but again not all aspects of her character and behaviour are going to be released for public consumption.

 

I'm not on a mission to find trainwrecks or anything like that. But I don't want someone whose had a sheltered life. I want someone whose gone through a trial by fire, and came out a stronger, more humble, or more compassionate person.

 

There's a strong sense that you're looking for a fast and easy track to maturity by hanging on the coat-tails of someone who's experienced some of life's harsher lessons. I don't expect you to agree with that, as it's not very flattering. Nonetheless, that's the sense I get.

 

I'm going to bow out of this thread now, as this is just turning into another of those circular discussions that won't produce any kind of valuable insight.

[Pink Amulet]

Thank you for taking the time to reply to me personally Chinook. As I could not reply to you... I will reply here...

 

The distinction should have been made between "terminally ill cancer patients" and "cancer patients" as most cancer patients are fighters and would not just give up in the face of adversity. When it comes to life and death, most chose life.

[Walk]

Your post was spectacular, Chinook.

 

The idea that anyone would want painful memories and PTSD to be complicating the life of the person they fall in love with is something I also find strange. You love people despite the scars and baggage that trauma leaves...not because of them.

 

I agree. Chinook's post was right on the money.

 

This was what I was attempting to say earlier in this thread. That people who have been through hardship have both mental and emotional scares from the experience. I drank heavily and smoked pot so I wouldnt' have to deal with the "now" I was going through. It took me years and years to emotionally deal with everything that's happened in my life. Hell, I'm still dealing with it.

 

And your list is mutually exclusive and can't be combined the way you have it. If you find someone who's gone through hardship and actually managed to never go off the deep end even for a bit... well, I'd lke to meet that person... but I never have. I know that in the past I've gone off the deep end... I smoked pot, used to drink to the point where I blacked out nearly every night, used men for purely sexual reasons and done numerous other things I'm not proud of. My hardship isn't an excuse, but I cracked under it. Plain and simple. I couldn't hold up. But I cracked, and I'm still trying to rebuild myself.

 

Yet you want a saint, or a martyr. I'm not sure which.

 

Your basic concept (I think) is that you want someone who doesn't feel they are above others. Who realizes they have flaws and who treats others as they would like to be treated. But to say they have to have had tragedy in their lives...? I think you are linking two ideas that aren't necessarily connected.

[blind_otter]

My deal breakers:

 

- lives with his parents

- doesn't own a car

- doesn't have a job

- has no goals in life

- has anger problems or is controlling

- close minded or judgemental

- someone who doesn't value education

- superficial or self centered

- lazy

- doesn't do some type of physical fitness activity

- poor hygiene

- virgins (just a personal thing, no offense)

 

I wouldn't date someone who had an easy life because they wouldn't understand me. I've tried and it never works. Overcoming the things that I have in my life is still a daily struggle. Also, IME, it's a lot more difficult to have deep compassion if you haven't experienced hardships.

[norajane]

I won't date someone who:

 

3. Grew up with rich parents

4. Has not had a hard life or has not had to deal with great tragedy or disappointment

6. Is a female-power she-man. Give me a demure, homely girl anyday. Someone kind of who is like Laura Bush. No Hillary Clinton for me, or drunk, obnoxious girls at bars!

12. Is religious

 

The type of girl I'd like to meet is someone who has to overcome a great tragedy or other hardship....something that definitely builds their character, such as being poor, having had a major illness at one time, such as cancer, or being orphaned or having a parent die.

 

I don't want a ball-buster like Hillary Clinton. I want a more demure, "homely" woman like Laura Bush, someone who is a little more laidback and fits the feminine standard I have.

 

Why would I want to marry some princess who has gone her entire life with a sense of entitlement? Why would I want to deal with someone who has had an otherwise pretty charmed life?

 

I want to be with someone who has been tested, and perhaps tested often, and who came out of that a better person. I know there are people who crumble when faced with hardship. It is unfortunate, but I don't want to be with them. I would rather be with someone who faced harsh reality and marched on.

 

I'm not on a mission to find trainwrecks or anything like that. But I don't want someone whose had a sheltered life. I want someone whose gone through a trial by fire, and came out a stronger, more humble, or more compassionate person.

 

 

I'm afraid you're going to have to give your dream of Laura Bush. She is the epitome of a sheltered life. And p.s.: she's very religious.

 

Ah, wait. She did run a stop sign when she was 17 and killed another 17 year old classmate. I guess she overcame that tragedy and marched on.

[TheSilentType]

Yes, I realize its difficult to deal with hardship or tragedy, and that some people when faced with such circumstances fall off the deep end. I can't judge them as necessarily being weaker of bad people for doing so because I probably don't know what they have gone through. But I think others, when faced with similar circumstances, approach their situation in a much more constructive way. Yes, they might grieve or be bitter and angry. I mean, who really embraces hardship with cheers and smiles? But in spite of what they may feel temporarily, they learn not to self-destruct, to move on, and to develop mature (vs. immature) coping mechanisms.

There's some sort of resilience there, and I think it has a lot to due with their character and attitude. Hence, why I want to be with someone like that.

 

Why would I want to be with some very pretty rich girl who has had a relatively easy life? If two persons had nearly the exact same qualities, I think I would tend to choose the girl from the poor family who had to work two jobs to support herself through school and her family vs. the rich girl who was given a nice car for her birthday.

 

I think hardships and being temporarily defeated in life are great learning experiences. You learn a lot by going to the school or "hard-knocks," and I want to be with someone like that.

 

I simply don't buy your reasoning that everyone whose dealt with tragedy and disappointment is some emotionally wrecked person. Some people are, but some people aren't. I will find the ones that aren't.

[TheSilentType]

 

I'm afraid you're going to have to give your dream of Laura Bush. She is the epitome of a sheltered life. And p.s.: she's very religious.

 

Ah, wait. She did run a stop sign when she was 17 and killed another 17 year old classmate. I guess she overcame that tragedy and marched on.

 

Well I'm not looking for Laura Bush per say. I'm looking for a person like her sans the religious aspect and killing some at 17 aspect. I'm looking for someone demure, low-key, and laidback like her. You don't see her marching to the Capitol and getting in everyone's face like Hillary Clinton.

 

I just tend to be drawn to girls like that. Others guys probably want different. I know I can get it because I'm surrounded by awesome girls like that. Now, its just a matter of trying and knocking on doors to find the one that opens for me.

[TheSilentType]

Also, IME, it's a lot more difficult to have deep compassion if you haven't experienced hardships.

 

I agree

[Outcast]

my ideals of "deal-breakers".

 

Closed minded

Judgemental

Hypocritical

Lacking compassion

Lacking empathy

Belief that he's better than others

Cruelty to others

Inability to see own flaws

 

Couldn't agree more. These add up to low EQ. I steer FAR clear of those.

 

I once lost all interest in a girl when she chewed with her mouth open

 

See, this is just a habit. It can be changed. It is not intrinsic to a person's values or persona. IMHO ditching someone for something so superficial is an indicator of the ditcher's values - not good. Similarly, someone who is judgmental to the extent that he'd prejudge a person's value by lumping her into a group of imagined 'saints' or 'sinners'.

 

OTOH a person who is regularly rude to service clerks, etc. is showing a very unattractive personality trait and that would be a deal-breaker.

[john1776]

My dealbreakers are:

 

1. she's spiritually abusive

2. cheating (standard dealbreaker)

3. materially ambitious

4. wants kids

5. does not put her family first

6. believes that sex is the foundation for a relationship

7. republican

8. acts like she's lost without me

9. allows society to do her thinking for her instead of being her own person

10. pushing the issue of marriage

[kulyok]

My dealbreakers:

 

1) He does not love me;

2) I do not love him.