dealbreakers

[CaptKirby]

So I am a feminist for having at some point stopped and examined a trite viewpoint that most people hold without thinking about? I do not make jokes about women and kitchens, and I despise the pathetic cowardice of a man afraid of a woman in any way "superior" to him. It has nothing to do with caring about women's rights or honor or anything, it is just disgusting.

Please give me back my fucking right to have Deck Knight on my ignore list.

 

[Glen]

WHAT IS A MAN, A MISERABLE PILE OF PATHETIC COWARDICE

 

[Matthew]

This is my opinion. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My opinion is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my opinion is useless. Without my opinion, I am useless

 

[cookie]

OPINIONS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE BARRACKS

 

[DM]

So I am a feminist for having at some point stopped and examined a trite viewpoint that most people hold without thinking about? I do not make jokes about women and kitchens, and I despise the pathetic cowardice of a man afraid of a woman in any way "superior" to him. It has nothing to do with caring about women's rights or honor or anything, it is just disgusting.

Please give me back my fucking right to have Deck Knight on my ignore list.

I called you a feminist because you're spouting that same old tired bullshit that all the illogical, militant, misled feminists spout. If you want to know what you are currently reminding me of, go find that recent thread about "rape enablers".

And no, I don't think about taller women being less attractive, because you don't get to choose who you find attractive and who you don't. If you could, there'd be a whole lot less heartache in this world.

 

[Objection]

this thread would be better if it were titled "turn-offs" because having so many qualities that would entirely put you off getting with someone is a pretty close-minded way to look at people, and will leave you alone for a very long time if you actually adhere to such standards

I don't know about you but I consider relationships to be a big deal. If I'm going to have a relationship (and that's a big if, I know), I don't want a second-rate one, and if the first-rate one is going to be impossible to get, then I'll just not have one. It's not like relationships are even compulsory anyway, even if I am missing out on something amazing.

That said, here are some of the things that I would call 'dealbreakers' (ie, fulfil any of these criteria and you're out):

• Incapable of or unwilling to apply logical argument - I don't mind arguments, as long as you argue logically. Emotional appeals and other fallacious reasoning would only make me consider you to be a terrible logical thinker, and terrible logical thinker equates to dumbass, and dumbass equates to terrible relationship material.
• Tobacco smoker - I can't really judge regarding bad breath since I myself have bad breath (not from smoking though). My issue with cigarette smoking is that it is a completely illogical choice, providing no benefits that cannot be obtained via easier methods while bringing a whole host of drawbacks. Choosing to smoke shows a lack of logical thought, which equates to dumbass, and you know how it goes from there.
• Expects me to get the hint - if you don't explicitly tell me what it is you want me to do, how the fuck should I know? Hints are not clear as crystal, and if you are to communicate effectively with me, you have to be clear as crystal. Tell it to me straight, otherwise don't expect me to know what you're on about.
  • Excessive sarcasm comes under this
• Can't handle the truth - yes, your bum does look big in that, it's a fact. Either accept it or take measures to change it. Don't whine and bitch about it because that accomplishes nothing and makes you look like a baby. Furthermore, do not expect me to lie to you. You have the right to know the truth, even if said truth is "I shouldn't tell you" (though I will rarely if ever use a phrase like that).
• Lies to me - a relationship can't work if we can't be honest with each other. Now I'm not saying I should know everything. I'm saying that if there's something that I shouldn't know about, say something like "That's a private matter" or "You really don't want to know". I'll get the message. You don't need to conjure up a lie to fob me off. Lying to me suggests that you're up to something that I really should know about but for some reason you don't want me to (eg, cheating). Once I know that you are willing to lie to me once, then for all I know, you are willing to lie to me every time you speak. How do I know whether or not to trust you? How can I have a relationship with you if I can't trust you?
  • Playing hard to get comes under this
• Cheats on me - the kind of love that is required in a relationship is not the kind of love you can have for more than one person. If you're willing to cheat on me, then you are proving that you love someone else instead of me. If that's the case, then why are you in a relationship with me? There's only one answer I can think of, and that is ...
• Manipulator - you're in this relationship not because you love me but because I have something that you want for free. Other people's hearts are not your toys. Be glad I don't have it in me to kill another human being.
• Does not want me - I am not going to delude myself into thinking that a relationship can work if you do not want a relationship with me.

Now, here is an incomplete list of 'turn-offs' (more bearable than dealbreakers but still undesirable):

• Piercings - earrings are borderline OK, but anything else is just hideous to me, belly button piercings especially so.
• Super skinny - look, I'm already so skinny that it's unhealthy. You shouldn't be weighing less than me unless you're like six inches shorter than me (and that is covered by the next item on this list). There's got to be some meat on the bones. Oddly, I would prefer a distinctly fat girl (but there's a line between fat and obese)
• Shortness - oddly, I would prefer a taller girl. Anything more than half a head shorter than me is going to be awkward, but still potentially workable. Naturally, there will be some problems on the other end of the scale, but I could handle anything up to 3/4 of a head taller than me with little/no trouble.
• Smoker (non-tobacco) - maybe there is a logical reason for smoking a substance other than tobacco (if not then I'll just move this up with the dealbreakers). However, it just doesn't look right and I'm pretty sure it's going to leave some nasty smells behind. Speaking of smells ...
• Excessive perfume and related products - now, I'm all for hygiene, but perfumes and the like are artificial one-size-fits-all odours that anyone can just stick on themselves. I want the real you, not the you that you think will get the guys. You might be surprised by how much I like or even prefer your natural odour.
• Excessive make-up - see above, replace odour with appearance
• Afraid to go against the grain - the majority isn't always right and you don't have to be liked by the majority all the time. The only reason this is not a dealbreaker is that there may occasionally be some genuine logical reason to avoid going against the grain.

Note that both lists are incomplete. I may or may not go back and add things to them.

 

[Myzozoa]

piercings and tats are great generally. There are some that are awful looking of course, but I feel that for the most part they only enhance appearance.

 

[tito]

short hair - I only like girls with long hair

non smokers and drinkers - i love girls that smoke (only weed though) and drink. bonus points if the girl can make her own artifacts for smoking.

is from anywhere other than canada - yup, only canadians for me

wears skirts - I only like girls that wear pants

normal eye color - must have blue or green eyes or gtfo

is tall - i only like short girls. preferably under 5'4.

doesnt play videogames - must play or at least like games like pokemon and portal.

is tanned - i only like pale girls

likes hip hop and that shit - ska and stuff like muse are musts.

 

[Johann]

short hair - I only like girls with long hair

non smokers and drinkers - i love girls that smoke (only weed though) and drink. bonus points if the girl can make her own artifacts for smoking.

is from anywhere other than canada - yup, only canadians for me

wears skirts - I only like girls that wear pants

normal eye color - must have blue or green eyes or gtfo

is tall - i only like short girls. preferably under 5'4.

doesnt play videogames - must play or at least like games like pokemon and portal.

is tanned - i only like pale girls

likes hip hop and that shit - ska and stuff like muse are musts.

Have fun never having a girlfriend.

 

[tito]

oh i already found her ^^

 

[Glen]

Muse Rules Rap Sucks

 

[Improbability]

Muse Rules Rap Sucks

And I don't think a girl that fits those criteria would be too hard to find, although rare. Might want to ditch the eye colour and doesnt wear skirts part though.

 

[ivar]

actual deal breakers:

-is a serial killer
-too ethnic (like chinese or indian)
-really tall (like 6"5...)
-has an std
-ugly and/or fat
-smells really bad constantly
-is actually an owl

not deal breakers but things i don't like:

-short hair
-dumb
-dull
-overly peppy/loud and obnoxious
-reserved
-is actually a dog

 

[JabbaTheGriffin]

obviously i have to be attracted to the girl

but besides the aesthetic shit, the one thing i absolutely cannot stand is when i make a joke at a girl's expense and her response is consistently one of those girly punches in the arm rather than a retort. i love a girl who can keep a back and forth going and copping out with an arm punch is bullshit.

kind of like what ouro and glen were getting at, but the arm punch thing specifically pisses me off the most.

 

[MrIndigo]

Actual dealbreaker: bad teeth.

 

[His Eminence Lord Poppington II]

too ethnic...?

 

[cookie]

I don't know about you but I consider relationships to be a big deal. If I'm going to have a relationship (and that's a big if, I know), I don't want a second-rate one, and if the first-rate one is going to be impossible to get, then I'll just not have one. It's not like relationships are even compulsory anyway, even if I am missing out on something amazing.

one word: compromise

also a "second-rate" relationship doesn't require you to hold ridiculous standards for the person because the person=/=the relationship

 

[shade]

i hope all you lads look like brad pitt

 

[WaterBomb]

i hope all you lads look like brad pitt

See, you and others are saying this, but I never really had trouble finding girlfriends. I am not the most attractive guy in the world either, so I can't use that as a counter for my dealbreakers. My point is that having a specific list of "non-negotiables" is not necessarily going to preclude you from having a girlfriend. All you are doing is narrowing the selection to find someone more compatible with you.

 

[Lanturn314]

I agree with Waterbomb. There are a lot of people in this world, and most of the criteria people gave is relatively general... Looking a everyone's lists seperately, I can think of at least one or two people I know who fit each. Having standards is never a bad thing.... And most of the time, I feel like the things people are listing here like height and eye color and such fall more under the category of "turn-offs," except for a few things like smoking and cheating which are truly deal breakers.

So if you think about it that way (with turn-offs being more negotiable than deal breakers), there's no reason to think these guys can't find SOMEONE who adheres to their list. Heck, I've already found a few people that adhere to mine, and holding out for someone like the person on my list has really paid off IMO. I have a wonderful boyfriend now :)

PS. CK, I have no clue how you think that being more attracted to taller guys than shorter guys makes me sexist... it's just a natural thing, not something I can really help. It has nothing to do with "manliness", nor do I think I'd be ridiculed for dating a shorter guy (as I said, I almost did once but it didn't work out for other reasons). And as if your wanting to date someone with big boobs ISN'T going by a "predefined gender norm"! lol. I mean, come on. I don't think that's sexist either though, because tha attraction is similarly out of your control. You're being so unreasonable here that I almost think you're trolling.

 

[Synre]

one word: compromise

Yeah, I'm glad someone said this (and with that word in particular) -- to the best of my knowledge dating doesn't tend to be like you're ordering at a restaurant and filling in checkboxes of traits you want and asking them to hold the tomatoes. In real life people, people have their own experiences and traits and probably you're not going to find exactly what you wanted or wind up falling in love with something completely different than what you expected to find, the tomatoes are already there, baby. But that word, compromise, that's what makes it work. Sometimes it's gotta stop being all about you. And your meticulously assembled list of undesirable traits.

Relationships leave plenty of time for people to slowly and creepily converge into being the same person anyway.

 

[Rayquaza2233]

I agree with Waterbomb. There are a lot of people in this world, and most of the criteria people gave is relatively general... Looking a everyone's lists seperately, I can think of at least one or two people I know who fit each. Having standards is never a bad thing.... And most of the time, I feel like the things people are listing here like height and eye color and such fall more under the category of "turn-offs," except for a few things like smoking and cheating which are truly deal breakers.

So if you think about it that way (with turn-offs being more negotiable than deal breakers), there's no reason to think these guys can't find SOMEONE who adheres to their list. Heck, I've already found a few people that adhere to mine, and holding out for someone like the person on my list has really paid off IMO. I have a wonderful boyfriend now :)

Yes, but what are the chances that both of you adhere to each other's lists? Relationships are a two-way street.

btw alt+s to submit posts owns

 

[Lanturn314]

Yes, but what are the chances that both of you adhere to each other's lists? Relationships are a two-way street.

btw alt+s to submit posts owns

Well, think of it this way:
If one of someone's dealbreakers is that they'll never date a smoker, then they will find a non-smoker to date. The probability that the nonsmoker will have a criterion on their list that says they absolutely want to date a smoker is pretty small.

If one of someone's criteria is that their future partner cannot be a religious nutbag, they will start dating someone who isn't a religious nutbag. And the non-religious nutbag they end up dating likely won't want a religious nutbag either.

Someone wants to date someone who likes video games, and the person they end up dating likes video games. They have a lot of fun playing video games together once they end up dating.


And so on. These lists are pretty good filters, actually. The only thing that might be non self-selecting is the aesthetic stuff, but that tends to be more negotiable anyway, and no one is going to start dating a person who they're not at least somewhat attracted to.

Of course, adhering to the standards doesn't always produce perfect results, because no one is perfect. And most of the time, one person is more into the other person than the other person is into them, probably because the other person sees something in their partner that's somewhat of a turn-off for them. But when both partners meet each other's lists perfectly, the relationship has a pretty good chance of actually working out, because people who share similar values get along well. And if partners share similar lists, they probably also share similar values.





So while someone with a long list might end up alone for long periods of time, once they find someone who does adhere to their list, they are much more likely to be in a happy relationship with that person than someone who will date anyone who walks down the street based on attraction alone.

 

[Rayquaza2233]

Being the bitter nerd I am, I think I disproved relationships with (likely incorrect) math.

Let's say there are 25 characteristics a person's SO must have. (I hope that's conservative n_n) The SO can either have them or not have them. 2^25 possibilities. There's one combination that yields that, 25C25.

(1/(2^25)) * 100 = 0.00000298023223876953125% chance of a person finding someone with their qualities. We have to square this since this is also the chance of our theoretical person fitting his theoretical SO's qualities.

8.8817841970012523233890533447266e-12% chance this happens. Multiply that by the 6,775,235,700 people in the world and there are 0.0601761813712187176861334592104 people in the world that are meant for our theoretical person. 0.06. Not even a whole person.

 

[Synre]

Hey thanks Rayquaza2233 i just found one of my dealbreakers