There have been two threads recently about whether certain things would be dating dealbreakers for you. I was surprised at the number of people who felt that you were being unfair/bad/intolerant/etc. if you don’t date someone because ‘this person thinks homosexuality is morraly wrong’ or ‘this person has a significant disability that hinders daily life’.
Where do people generally draw the line for ‘you’re being bad/unfair/mean/foolish/otherwise not-good to use this as a dealbreaker’, and how far down the dating ladder do you have to go before you can call things off? I think that ‘this person thinks my friends are immoral for existing/getting married/etc.’ is a perfectly reasonable dealbreaker for dating, for example, and I think it’s great if it comes up early. Other people seemed to think that was not a good enough reason to decide not to date someone, and (I’m guessing) felt that you should invest significant time and energy into that person before deciding that they aren’t compatible with you.
I completely agree with this. And you can have whatever dealbreakers you’d like and not be bad/unfair/mean/otherwise not-good. If someone has too long of a list of dealbreakers, they might be foolish, but I still wouldn’t bother them about it unless they were often lamenting how they can’t find anyone good. I would hesitate to call any one specific dealbreaker foolish, because some issue that sounds petty to me might be important to another person, or a signal of something else why they aren’t interested.
Since no one is obligated to find another person attractive or relationship-worthy, all reasons are valid and acceptable.
That doesn’t mean you’re immune from judgement, though, and I think this is a point people often miss in discussions like this. You want to only date thin people while you’re noticeably overweight? It’s a free country, so knock yourself out. But the consequence of that preference is being judged as shallow and hypocritical. It is also unlikely you’ll elicit much sympathy if you remain involuntarily single.
I have a friend who once admitted she isn’t attracted to guys unless they show some fashion savvy. Like wearing shoes that are “in”. Personally, that is the last thing I care about in a mate, but whatever, it’s her preference not mine. So I just nodded my head when she told me this. Does this mean I think focusing on what kind of shoes someone is wearing bodes well for her dating strategy? Hell no.
This was a former coworker of mine. He was smart, funny, financially secure, and an all-around nice guy. But he had a very specific physical requirement for the kind of woman he wanted to date. And the city where he lived wasn’t exactly known for tall, willowy, supermodel-types. When he did find someone who met his rather stringent qualifications, it rarely lasted very long. So now he’s in his middle 50s and still looking. Maybe if he’d been less picky, he’d have found his soulmate in a different package. But it’s his life.
I don’t think of dating the same way i do being engaged. Having fun with someone who I am physically attracted to is fine for dating. It also gives me an opportunity to see that people with views who don’t coincide with mine still might be very nice people. I know tons of people who are happily married with very different sets of core values and political beliefs. Good chemistry can often override these things.
Any reason is valid. Why should someone have to date someone who has qualities one finds distasteful? How is that good for either of the couple?
I mean, you’re kind of a jerk if you put “NO FATTIES!” at the top of your dating profile but if you see my photo and decide I’m not the type of body you’re in to that’s fine. And the “no fatties!” guy helped me dodge a bullet anyway. I wouldn’t want to be with someone who finds my body gross!
The more interesting question is did your standards of who you would date change before and after your first LTR?
OR
Did your standards of who you would date change before and after you first lived with someone?
Man, I have loads of reasons, the vast majority are me being unfair/bad/intolerant, and they’re all acceptable to me. You have a cat? Done. You like cats? Done. You smoke? Done. You look like a sleestak? Done. You say “like” too many times? Done. IDGAF.
I mean, I can afford to be picky but it’s not like I’m ALL-NO-ALL-THE-TIME, there are bazillion things I’ll make concessions on. If you look for someone perfect, you’re going to be looking a long-ass time. I know those people. I don’t understand them at all, usually because they have glaring flaws themselves.
*Edit:
And to answer Saint Cad, I’d think (hope?) standards change after every relationship, no? Hell, half of my reasons for hitting the buzzer are because of “Nope, not doing that again!”
First of all you lost internet points for not linking to this in your post. Second, what if she has a great personality? And does it matter if she has that asthma hiss or not?
Talking about changing standards after a relationship. I was engaged to a woman who was drop-dead gorgeous, phenomenal in bed and fantastic personality. BUT with her mood swings it was like riding a roller coaster and sometimes you have to get off. After that I just will not date anyone who is bipolar no matter how many pros there are.
It’s noteworthy that discrimination based off of certain characteristics is condemned in most aspects of modern society, but when it comes to dating and relationships, the discrimination rules are often different.
I think the general principles are the same; the only thing changing is how much the person’s attitude is affecting the world beyond their own life.
Someone who says “I would never date a black person” must have their reasons, and I would almost certainly find those reasons personally repugnant, but in the end it’s their business because it isn’t hurting anyone but that person. Dating isn’t a civil right.
When the same person says “I would never hire a black person,” that’s on another level, and worthy of public censure.
I once foolishly went out to dinner with a man who was a customer of the car dealership where I worked. It was a miserable evening, we had nothing in common and he held many ideas that I found repellent. The next time he came to my place of work he followed me to my office and asked me out again. I said, no, sorry, I don’t think that’s a good idea. He then spent several minutes asking me over and over why I wouldn’t go out with him. Why? Why? I finally asked him if it would really make him feel better if I told him a list of things I didn’t like about him. He said yes. I said, we’re done talking, and I went into the ladies’ room. I wouldn’t have been surprised if he’d followed me in there, but he didn’t.
Yeah, any excuse is good enough, and you should never have to explain!
After considering the question for myself and reading other members answers I really want to flip the question around.
Are there any really unacceptable reasons to not date someone.
Dating is a matter of personal chemistry, or at least about having fun. If it’s not there, it’s not there. No amount of public opinion or legislation will change that.
