[NT] The NT Females' List of Deal Breakers

[Tamske]

6,697,254,041 replies and I'll be convinced. Of course not all artists smoke, but highlighting an obvious exaggeration used for dramatic effect is still pedantic. So, why the hatred for smokers? Does it matter if I also run 6 miles a day? I'm just questioning the rationale used for everyone's deal breakers. Many have stated that certain aspects of their lists will be evaluated in context, but then a list is irrelevant.

I don't hate smokers. I just don't want one in the same house as I am, because I get REALLY out of breath and feel ill. My lungs are literally too small and weak. Almost any contaminant can tip the scales from "feeling well" to "feeling ill"; pollen, cat hair, smog, ... smoke.
I don't want to live together with someone who makes me ill. I'm able to be your coworker and your friend. The fact that you care for your own health is good, of course; but if you want to live together with me you have to take care of my health too. It's a selfish reason.

 

[copperfish17]

You're telling me that you don't have any thoughts that cross your mind about preferences, people or habits that aggravate you, types of behaviours that you experienced in the past that were detrimental to a relationship... nothing?

Ah, I'm not saying that at all. I echo the sentiments in these posts, specifically:

I just don't find it helpful to construct [a list], maybe I just don't know myself well enough, but part of me instinctively rebels against the process.

i think if i bothered to collate my list it would contain anti-social behaviours and criminal behaviours, which reflect societal norms and therefore not a very useful selection criteria... defeats the purpose of making the list.

I genuinely can't come up with a definitive list, and have no need of one. But that doesn't mean I don't have standards, as in, anything goes.
Most of the things I could think of would be self-evident (e.g. not a pedophile/rapist/wife-beater) and wouldn't shed any light on specific issues for NT women or me personally.

Would I have an open relationship, for example? Maybe. I don't know. I'd have to see how I felt at the time, with the person(s) in question. I'm not really comfortable ruling things out. It doesn't violate any of my principles, but at the same time I don't know if jealousy would be a problem.

...

Part of the issue is that I know I've been wrong in the past about what I want or like or would put up with or find attractive, and I'm just as likely to be wrong now.
The heart wants what it wants.

I think the problem is that for some people, the list is clear-cut; for others, each individual is a "package" and no one is going to fit the items, and it's not easy to define ahead of time which items are dependent (or how much) on other items or can be bartered back and forth; hence, it's just a lot easier and far more realistic to look at an individual case and determine whether it'll be acceptable or not rather than trying to create a standardized general list apart from the individual. We are not laying pipe here, we are exploring relationships....

Also, I'm sure most people look better IRL than on paper.

 

[ZPowers]

I'm an ex-smoker (well, more honestly, I'd probably still be considered as 'quitting' by most, but for the time being my clothes and breath are non-smokey and there is not a pack in my pocket, so by what measure a man, I suppose) and I think we all know there's certain non-personal aspects of smoking that are less than great, even those of us who do smoke. It doesn't bother me (I stopped for other reasons, money first and health second), but I can't blame people for being bothered by it.

I also used to know someone who could never date a smoker because someone she cared about died due to smoking related issues, which seemed fair to me.

 

[Kasper]

Must connect with me.

Must be open minded.

Won't tolerate any form of bigotry.

Must understand and appreciate the fine art form of sarcasm.

Ideally loves fun and adventure.

Other than that I'm with Morgan et al, narrowing options isn't my thing, in the right context most things could be acceptable.

I don't like the idea of getting involved with someone who has previously been married, but I wouldn't write someone off for it, I'm not really interested in getting involved with someone with kids, but again I wouldn't make it a deal breaker. On the extreme even things like drug use, someone with a police record or ex-con could have reasons for their actions that I consider acceptable, so why blanket refuse to even consider them?

Basically anything I've decided on in the past that would be a level of standards have been shot to shit if and when I met someone who I connected with emotionally and intellectually.

Any list I create would be so generic and cliché that it's pointless. I'll just go; with I know it when I see it.

 

[Arthur Schopenhauer]

Women.

 

[Tamske]

Women.

Well, we do invest more than our share in the offspring - large eggs, the mitochondria, the gestation and more often than not the upbringing too.
It's not more than fair that we're choosy for the man whose genes gets to ride on the rollercoaster of life, when we deliver most of the energy for that rollercoaster ride.

 

[Weber]

Well, we do invest more than our share in the offspring - large eggs, the mitochondria, the gestation and more often than not the upbringing too.
It's not more than fair that we're choosy for the man whose genes gets to ride on the rollercoaster of life, when we deliver most of the energy for that rollercoaster ride.

I'm fairly certain not all of the women in this thread even want children.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm fairly certain not all of the women in this thread even want children.

Kids are a large life/energy/time investment.
Not everyone wants to make that investment.

Also, I'm sure most people look better IRL than on paper.

That's always the problem with lists.

A person is more than the sum of his stat sheet.

 

[Orpheus]

Well, we do invest more than our share in the offspring - large eggs, the mitochondria, the gestation and more often than not the upbringing too.
It's not more than fair that we're choosy for the man whose genes gets to ride on the rollercoaster of life, when we deliver most of the energy for that rollercoaster ride.

Look, I'm not marginalizing pregnancy (I wouldn't want to do it), but you seem to be insinuating that men don't sacrifice anything. Personality types aside, women tend to be a tad more emotional than men. I know it sounds like misogyny, but even the most grounded women seem to be in a constant state of emotional flux. As a man, a sex that does not have a monthly cycle, this can be stressful. I'm not just talking about PMS. I'm talking about the entire cycle, every month. I love women, I respect women, I think in most ways you are superior creatures to men, but the emotional rollercoaster takes its toll. Not to mention the fact that, if you decide to end your marriage or relationship (at least in this day and age), the man will more than likely be supremely fucked by the court system. Both sexes are gambling when they decide to marry and procreate.

 

[Orpheus]

Don't bother. The threshold for "we all" is shockingly low.

I freely admitted that I was exaggerating. Now, admit you're anal.

 

[Totenkindly]

Look, I'm not marginalizing pregnancy (I wouldn't want to do it), but you seem to be insinuating that men don't sacrifice anything. Personality types aside, women tend to be a tad more emotional than men. I know it sounds like misogyny, but even the most grounded women seem to be in a constant state of emotional flux. As a man, a sex that does not have a monthly cycle, this can be stressful. I'm not just talking about PMS. I'm talking about the entire cycle, every month. I love women, I respect women, I think in most ways you are superior creatures to men, but the emotional rollercoaster takes its toll. Not to mention the fact that, if you decide to end your marriage or relationship (at least in this day and age), the man will more than likely be supremely fucked by the court system. Both sexes are gambling when they decide to marry and procreate.

There are different things each gender has to deal with, and men do have the disadvantages you state. However, I'm seen and experienced marriage and child-rising close up and from lots of different angles... and typically the female takes a lot more responsibility over the children in the hands-on care, while the male has more flexibilty in just being able to bail and disappear when he wants... especiall on an informal level. (The kids are crying? Just hide in the office or ignore it long enough and Mom usually picks up the ball. Not working? Disappear down to the grocery or the hardware store or somewhere else on a convenient errand. Kids are sick? Mom changes her schedule to get them to the doctor and rearranges her day and meanwhile spends the day with a whiny sick child. Some men step up to the plate... but sometimes they can't due to their jobs, and it's still a tendency for women to intervene first or carry the bulk of the kid-raising load.)

It's just the way it works, especially considering how women are connected more intimately to the children even before they are born and tend to intervene a lot sooner to supply their needs. A lot of those rules that you are complaining about were developed to compensate for the reality that the woman often bears a lot more personal responsibility for the child just by nature, and she needs reassurance that she'll have the resources she needs if the man disappears.

But it's sort of beside the point of the thread, and I'm not sure how we got on the topic. I mean, men can have an idea of what they want in a mate too, and this was just a thread for NT women's concept of a good mate (if there is such a thing).

 

[tcda]

Why do women value sense of humour so much? I never got that, or heard a good explanation. If you ask men to make a list for a relationship, I bet very few will list of humour as a fundamental issue.

 

[JocktheMotie]

Why do women value sense of humour so much? I never got that, or heard a good explanation. If you ask men to make a list for a relationship, I bet very few will list of humour as a fundamental issue.

 

[Totenkindly]

Why do women value sense of humour so much? I never got that, or heard a good explanation. If you ask men to make a list for a relationship, I bet very few will list of humour as a fundamental issue.

I dunno, but it showed up in some recent articles I've read. Women seem to be attracted to men who make them laugh, men more to women who laugh at their jokes.

A sense of humor in guys usually suggests wit/intelligence, the ability to play and have fun, the ability to engage others, it can suggest creativity, maybe even laugh at himself. I find men interesting who are fun and open, and sense of humor goes along with that. A guy who doesn't have a sense of humor might potentially be anal, closed, mean, dull-witted, one-dimensional, slow.

I've hung out with more traditional women for whom security, consistency, and dependability are more important and their husbands can easily be more stoic and serious-minded. They are risk-avoidant by nature. Humor is a risk in that your joke might fail, so it can show confidence in taking chances and asserting oneself even on that minor level.

 

[Arthur Schopenhauer]

Well, we do invest more than our share in the offspring - large eggs, the mitochondria, the gestation and more often than not the upbringing too.
It's not more than fair that we're choosy for the man whose genes gets to ride on the rollercoaster of life, when we deliver most of the energy for that rollercoaster ride.

True. I was only joking. I have standards also.

 

[Orpheus]

But it's sort of beside the point of the thread, and I'm not sure how we got on the topic. I mean, men can have an idea of what they want in a mate too, and this was just a thread for NT women's concept of a good mate (if there is such a thing).

It's bound to happen. You didn't expect all the men to sit idly by did ya?

In response to the poster who thinks men don't look for funny... I do. It's not a requirement, but a clever girl is extremely attractive to me.

 

[tcda]

A sense of humor in guys usually suggests wit/intelligence, the ability to play and have fun, the ability to engage others, it can suggest creativity, maybe even laugh at himself. I find men interesting who are fun and open, and sense of humor goes along with that. A guy who doesn't have a sense of humor might potentially be anal, closed, mean, dull-witted, one-dimensional, slow.

Yeah mean I wouldn't want to date someone hwo had no sense of humour at all. But I guess my view is that 95% of the population has a sense of humour so it seems a bit redundant.

I've hung out with more traditional women for whom security, consistency, and dependability are more important and their husbands can easily be more stoic and serious-minded. They are risk-avoidant by nature. Humor is a risk in that your joke might fail, so it can show confidence in taking chances and asserting oneself even on that minor level.

hmm that makes sense.

I wonder also if it has something to do with being in a male-dominated society, so it's expected that it's up to the man to introduce humour or not, and women are more socially expected not to.

Because for a man I guess it's a bit more like - if I find something funny I'll laugh and the other person probably will too, and if there's ntohing funny I won't laugh and neither will they. Maybe for a woman it's more determined by what the man does because of social expectation.

Anyways apologies for the tangent I had just wondered why this "dealbreaker" always crops up.

 

[Tamske]

Look, I'm not marginalizing pregnancy (I wouldn't want to do it), but you seem to be insinuating that men don't sacrifice anything.

That was not my intention. I just put it strongly to make my point clear... the fact that men do have to make sacrifices too is a retaliation by the women. If you don't build me a nest (...) you won't get my egg.

Personality types aside, women tend to be a tad more emotional than men. I know it sounds like misogyny,

No, it isn't, unless you see "emotional" as an insult.

but even the most grounded women seem to be in a constant state of emotional flux. As a man, a sex that does not have a monthly cycle, this can be stressful. I'm not just talking about PMS. I'm talking about the entire cycle, every month.

True. Still, women can be emotional for other reasons than their hormones.

I love women, I respect women, I think in most ways you are superior creatures to men, but the emotional rollercoaster takes its toll. Not to mention the fact that, if you decide to end your marriage or relationship (at least in this day and age), the man will more than likely be supremely fucked by the court system.

And this is sad. It's as unjust as the glass ceiling, and probably comes from the same origin.
"Women aren't strong enough to work high-level jobs.
Women aren't strong, so the reason for ending a relationship must lie with the man."

Both sexes are gambling when they decide to marry and procreate.

True. Men are the low-cost high-risk gamblers; women the high-cost low-risk gamblers. An egg is much rarer than a sperm.

 

[Tamske]

Whoa, what happened to the thread while I was composing my answer?

 

[Orpheus]

If you don't build me a nest (...) you won't get my egg.

Jesus... that's a good line. I guess the healthy male perspective is: If you don't henpeck the living shit out of me, I'll build you the finest nest I'm capable of. Or maybe that's just me.