# Your absolute deal breakers.



## Korvyna (Dec 4, 2009)

pinkrasputin said:


> Not being on your own after a break up is a deal breaker for me. Prove to me you can be strong by yourself. That way if we were to be together I could feel like we would continue to grow individually as well as a couple.
> 
> Education is huge with me. I had to work my ass off to get mine. A college degree shows me you can make a commitment.
> 
> And I'll say it again, if you don't understand my humor we lack compatibility. Period. :tongue:


I really relate to this one... My ex is a prime example of the first one. I would hate being his girlfriend right now. Two days after the divorce was finalized, his girlfriend moved in. TWO DAYS! And he is still overly concerned with what I think of him. That would really make me feel like a nobody if I was his current girlfriend.

Education is huge with me too.... But a lot of mine comes from working in education and watching all my friends that don't have degrees struggle to find jobs because they lack the degree.


----------



## JavaGypsy (Jan 19, 2010)

1.Like me for who I am and don't try to change me.
2.Show any form of jealousy - I like hanging out with men - don't like it too bad
3.I am no ones property - possessiveness sucks.


----------



## addle1618 (Oct 31, 2008)

Singularity said:


> *Poor communication skills*
> *Lack of conflict resolutions skills*
> *Ugliness in their heart (e.g. bigotry in all it's forms)*
> *Little desire for harmony*
> ...


wonderful list.

I will add overly needy to the point of halting my own progress.


----------



## Lilsnowy (Sep 9, 2009)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> In another 50 years, I won't be with my wife because she's smokin' hot or gives great head. I'll be with her because she is kind, because we see the world similarly, because we share the same interests and because of her oceanic compassion. If you're not looking down the road like this when you choose your partner, you will be setting yourself up for failure.


Emotionally toned, you've written an intelligent, insightful post. You have a good mind for the future, who you will be, and what kind of husband and father you will be, not just who you are today.

It's not all about looks and superficial qualities that won't stand the test of time. It's spirit and compassion and how you love and what you share. 

Something interesting about attraction though: I was working one day at a farmer's market, and a woman came in with her teenage daughter. They were both very pretty, and the mother had a very beautiful body, not super skinny, but curvy, even in sweats and a tank top. Several younger men in the store (early to mid 20s) stopped working to watch them walk by and someone said, "She is HOT." And the one next to him said, "Yeah, that's what the daughter will look like in twenty years." 

I thought it was great that they found the mother so attractive, but also, the insight he had about the daughter's looks in the future.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> I've been noticing that the only thing really attractive about young women (18-22) is the fact that they are young. I've started to see in their faces how they will look after the ravages of time have their way with them. Try this. Go to the mall and find a place to sit where many people will pass by. Then, count the number of smoking hot young women walk by and then count how many smoking hot 35 year old women walk by. When you tally up your numbers, do everything in your power to figure out why these numbers are so wildly out of proportion.
> 
> Perky tits? They'll end up tucked into a pair of sweatpants in no time. Fair skin and big eyes? Give it 15. The skin will wrinkle and the eyes will sink. Also, weight gain is inevitable. I try to tack 10-20 pounds on a girl when I look at her to see how she will fare.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that time will decimate beauty in 49/50 cases. The same goes for sexual compatibility. If you think the wild sex you're having will last forever, you're delusional. That is why I left these two off my list. In another 50 years, I won't be with my wife because she's smokin' hot or gives great head. I'll be with her because she is kind, because we see the world similarly, because we share the same interests and because of her oceanic compassion. If you're not looking down the road like this when you choose your partner, you will be setting yourself up for failure.


How another individual will age is none of your business. They don't exist for you to rate them based on these things. This is shallow and disgusting, and in no way related to anything in this thread. Perhaps find a more meaningful or rewarding activity than appointing yourself beauty pageant judge. Or take a look in the mirror and use your fine tuned superficial perception to nitpick -yourself-.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

napoleon227 said:


> Wow. Have trust issues? Have you been burned before?
> 
> Let me say this: I don't believe trust needs to be _earned_ - I believe it can be lost. You know, the whole innocent until proven guilty thing, nothing big, just the foundation of justice in the Western world.
> 
> ...


You are missing my point. How does a person know they can trust someone? You are asking them to have blind faith. That is naive. Look at the statistics on infidelity.. and you make it sound as if you would just leave someone for being perhaps inquisitive about your actions. If a person doesn't ask, then how do they know? They aren't psychic. They can't read your mind to know that the girl calling you at 3am is truly only a friend.


----------



## Just_Some_Guy (Oct 8, 2009)

Promethea said:


> How another individual will age is none of your business. They don't exist for you to rate them based on these things. This is shallow and disgusting, and in no way related to anything in this thread. Perhaps find a more meaningful or rewarding activity than appointing yourself beauty pageant judge. Or take a look in the mirror and use your fine tuned superficial perception to nitpick -yourself-.


Holy smokes, relax! I am not judging, I'm stating facts. In the context of choosing a partner, I am merely suggesting that one not base their decision upon looks and sexual performance alone. If anything, I am encouraging people _not to _rate others on these things. Making observations on how the human being ages, if anything is important as our society seems bent on denying aging and death forcing the ideals of youth onto people who are intrinsically not youthful. 

I'm not quite sure of your point. People age, that is a fact and I think that it is okay to talk about this. Perhaps one of the moderators of this forum will delete my posts if I have crossed some line. To call attention to the fact that we are time-bound creatures is shallow? I guess I don't see it that way. As mentioned above, I find this to be exceedingly relevant to this thread. I never said I judge people on how they look, I simply speculate how they will look when they are older. I'm not sure where you are getting this. And, in case you were wondering, I do look at myself in the mirror. I look in and see the man I was in my teens and how my waistline has expanded, how I've got bags under my eyes and how my hairline has crept back about a centimeter. I also look in the mirror and see a man with thin white hair and a peppered beard with a bigger nose and bigger ears, maybe missing a few teeth. Also, when I look in the mirror, I see a corpse. 

These are facts of life and I do not see anything offensive about this whatsoever. If you find fault with what I'm saying, I'm sorry. Perhaps you have your own issues to work through and I've touched a nerve. Be that as it may, the intention of my post is not as superficial as you would like to make it out to be.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> Holy smokes, relax! I am not judging, I'm stating facts. In the context of choosing a partner, I am merely suggesting that one not base their decision upon looks and sexual performance alone. If anything, I am encouraging people _not to _rate others on these things. Making observations on how the human being ages, if anything is important as our society seems bent on denying aging and death forcing the ideals of youth onto people who are intrinsically not youthful.
> 
> I'm not quite sure of your point. People age, that is a fact and I think that it is okay to talk about this. Perhaps one of the moderators of this forum will delete my posts if I have crossed some line. To call attention to the fact that we are time-bound creatures is shallow? I guess I don't see it that way. As mentioned above, I find this to be exceedingly relevant to this thread. I never said I judge people on how they look, I simply speculate how they will look when they are older. I'm not sure where you are getting this. And, in case you were wondering, I do look at myself in the mirror. I look in and see the man I was in my teens and how my waistline has expanded, how I've got bags under my eyes and how my hairline has crept back about a centimeter. I also look in the mirror and see a man with thin white hair and a peppered beard with a bigger nose and bigger ears, maybe missing a few teeth. Also, when I look in the mirror, I see a corpse.
> 
> These are facts of life and I do not see anything offensive about this whatsoever. If you find fault with what I'm saying, I'm sorry. Perhaps you have your own issues to work through and I've touched a nerve. Be that as it may, the intention of my post is not as superficial as you would like to make it out to be.


Ah, of course.. the "your own issues" defense. Swing, and a miss. Called you on this because of how needlessly brutal you are in judging the appearances of women whom you don't even know.. like they are objects for entertainment. Talking about tits sagging to the knees and packing on pounds. YOU need to examine YOUR issues with why you feel the need to nitpick other peoples appearances in this very superficial way. Not everyone does this. So you can say that these "are just facts" if you like - but the truth is for some reason you are focused on this very superficial thing. I barely hear such brutally disgusting things about women's appearances come out of the mouths of drunken jocks in sports bars.

Here is a fact: People age. Yes.

Your particular amount of attention to the detail in it is not fact though - but some kind of shallow fixation.


----------



## Just_Some_Guy (Oct 8, 2009)

Promethea said:


> Ah, of course.. the "your own issues" defense. Swing, and a miss. Called you on this because of how needlessly brutal you are in judging the appearances of women whom you don't even know.. like they are objects for entertainment. Talking about tits sagging to the knees and packing on pounds. YOU need to examine YOUR issues with why you feel the need to nitpick other peoples appearances in this very superficial way. Not everyone does this. So you can say that these "are just facts" if you like - but the truth is for some reason you are focused on this very superficial thing. I barely hear such brutally disgusting things about women's appearances come out of the mouths of drunken jocks in sports bars.
> 
> Here is a fact: People age. Yes.
> 
> Your particular amount of attention to the detail in it is not fact though - but some kind of shallow fixation.


You are blowing this _way _out of proportion. The venom and intensity in your last two posts suggests strongly that I have struck a nerve, so yes, this is your issue, not mine. I'm stating facts meant to demonstrate how superficial sexual attraction is, and there you are turning my words around adding _your own _connotation to what I have said to malign my character. I am focused on this because _this is superficial_. Your words. If it is so superficial, why are you making it out to be so important. We seem to be addressing this from two different angles and getting our wires crossed between. 

A.) People age.

B.) Physical characteristics of people are superficial.

We seem to be in total agreement.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

My dealbreakers are:
Being a man; I can't have a girl who's a dude!
Ignorance; stupidity, racism.
Cruelty; manipulative, bitch, high maintainance.
New York accent - think of how Tony Soprano's wife sounds and you'll know what I mean. The voice sounsd so whiny that I want to punch her lights out.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> You are blowing this _way _out of proportion. The venom and intensity in your last two posts suggests strongly that I have struck a nerve, so yes, this is your issue, not mine. I'm stating facts meant to demonstrate how superficial sexual attraction is, and there you are turning my words around adding _your own _connotation to what I have said to malign my character. I am focused on this because _this is superficial_. Your words. If it is so superficial, why are you making it out to be so important. We seem to be addressing this from two different angles and getting our wires crossed between.
> 
> A.) People age.
> 
> ...


You could have simply said that peoples appearances change as they age, rather than post the ugly tirade that paints an extremely unflattering portrait of women.


----------



## Just_Some_Guy (Oct 8, 2009)

Promethea said:


> You could have simply said that peoples appearances change as they age, rather than post the ugly tirade that paints an extremely unflattering portrait of women.


I realize that I upset you. Was it because I came across as isolating _women_ in such a way? Would it have been any better or worse had I given a vivid account of how men age poorly? If I was insensitive here, I'd like to know why, as that was the farthest thing I was intending.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> I realize that I upset you. Was it because I came across as isolating _women_ in such a way? Would it have been any better or worse had I given a vivid account of how men age poorly? If I was insensitive here, I'd like to know why, as that was the farthest thing I was intending.


Firstly, stop projecting emotional states onto people. It doesn't apply here, and it is beside the point.

Now, if you would have given an equally unflattering opinion of aging men, I would have called you on it as well. The unflattering nature of it, in such detail was over-kill. Why help feed into a sickness that an absurdly youth obsessed society creates?

And finally, we are getting off topic here. What was said in my last post in response to you should have made the point very clear. To maintain the integrity of the thread, I consider this matter closed.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

STOP the flame war! Back on topic now, or I'm calling in a mod.


----------



## JavaGypsy (Jan 19, 2010)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> I've been noticing that the only thing really attractive about young women (18-22) is the fact that they are young. I've started to see in their faces how they will look after the ravages of time have their way with them. Try this. Go to the mall and find a place to sit where many people will pass by. Then, count the number of smoking hot young women walk by and then count how many smoking hot 35 year old women walk by. When you tally up your numbers, do everything in your power to figure out why these numbers are so wildly out of proportion.
> 
> Perky tits? They'll end up tucked into a pair of sweatpants in no time. Fair skin and big eyes? Give it 15. The skin will wrinkle and the eyes will sink. Also, weight gain is inevitable. I try to tack 10-20 pounds on a girl when I look at her to see how she will fare.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that time will decimate beauty in 49/50 cases. The same goes for sexual compatibility. If you think the wild sex you're having will last forever, you're delusional. That is why I left these two off my list. In another 50 years, I won't be with my wife because she's smokin' hot or gives great head. I'll be with her because she is kind, because we see the world similarly, because we share the same interests and because of her oceanic compassion. If you're not looking down the road like this when you choose your partner, you will be setting yourself up for failure.


I totally get what you are saying - over the years I have gained and lost lots of weight, my hair styles have changed, and yes things are sagging, but I know for a fact during all this time my husband loves me for who I am as a person not for my looks.


----------



## napoleon227 (Jan 17, 2010)

Promethea said:


> You are missing my point. How does a person know they can trust someone? You are asking them to have blind faith. That is naive. Look at the statistics on infidelity.. and you make it sound as if you would just leave someone for being perhaps inquisitive about your actions. If a person doesn't ask, then how do they know? They aren't psychic. They can't read your mind to know that the girl calling you at 3am is truly only a friend.



No, I didn't miss your point, I got it. You don't trust anyone and you think I'm naive for trusting people too. OK.

I make it sound as if I would leave someone for being perhaps inquisitive about my actions. I make it sound that way, because that is exactly what I meant. On the other hand, I am also not very inquisitive about her actions.

Look, you go ahead and be untrusting all you want, if that is what you think is right. I trust my partner fully and she trusts me. I am very happy in my relationship, and I've had a number of other trusting relationships before that. Trust works for me, OK.

Meanwhile, you are a very beautiful woman. You are gorgeous. It's hard to imagine why anyone would want to cheat on you. Yet you seem to believe that is what will happen if you are not sufficiently "inquisitive".

You can't police human feelings, Promethea. You can't _force_ anyone to love you. But you _can_ drive them away by trying.

I will ask you again - how's that working out for you? My guess - not very well.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

napoleon227 said:


> No, I didn't miss your point, I got it. You don't trust anyone and you think I'm naive for trusting people too. OK.
> 
> I make it sound as if I would leave someone for being perhaps inquisitive about my actions. I make it sound that way, because that is exactly what I meant. On the other hand, I am also not very inquisitive about her actions.
> 
> ...


You are trying to make this personal, and it isn't. Your initial post said that if someone acts untrusting, they are out. I was saying it's stupid to not let someone ask questions and try to figure out if you are someone who can be trusted.

No thanks for the personal comments, and speculations on my history. That is a weak attempt to try to discredit my opinion of your statements.

Now, I have made my point very clear. It -is- naive to have blind faith in a person before you know them (they have proven they can be trusted) -- and, it's unfair to not "allow" someone to form that trust, and rather just call them 'jealous' or whatever the other word you used was.

So far as your policing feelings comment.. I don't even know where to start. You just jumped all over the place, making speculations and then this. Try to focus just on the point: you had in fact made it sound very black and white, that either a person trusts you unquestionably, or they are out. Like they aren't allowed to even ponder the trust thing with you.


----------



## napoleon227 (Jan 17, 2010)

Promethea said:


> You are trying to make this personal, and it isn't. Your initial post said that if someone acts untrusting, they are out. I was saying it's stupid to not let someone ask questions and try to figure out if you are someone who can be trusted.
> 
> No thanks for the personal comments, and speculations on my history. That is a weak attempt to try to discredit my opinion of your statements.
> 
> ...


OK, whatever. Let's agree to disagree, OK. I said I prefer to trust people until they prove untrustworthy, and I prefer not to be in a relationship with anyone who doesn't trust me, especially if I haven't done anything to cause suspicion. For me, possessiveness is a deal breaker, that's just my preference, I have my reasons, and I'm entitled to it. Besides, my approach works for me and always has, so you can call me naive all you want but I have the proof that it is not. 

You can take whatever approach you like too and I wish you the best of luck.


----------



## Outcode (Nov 28, 2009)

assbiscuits said:


> And I agree, someone adventurous, someone who likes to go on fun walks and hikes with me, or likes to go into that big broken down factory with me so we can kiss in private.


Can't tell you how amazing that sounds 

My list:

-Bitchy- I don't like mean people.
-Dishonest- Lying sucks.
-Bigot- Be more open minded plz.
-Slutty- It really really bothers me how some girls just don't care...
-Overly Critical- I'm a very laid-back person, it wouldn't work.
-Unfaithful- It speaks for itself.


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

I just remembered one I forgot to list.

7. *Betrayal or Abandonment.* If I am experiencing a crisis of some sort, or am in danger, he had best be dependable enough to at least _try_ to make it better. After all I went through with my abusive ex, the thing that finally ended my love for him was the time when I was having a nightmare, and woke up to find him staring at me, smiling as though he was enjoying my suffering. He said I had been calling out my brother's name and screaming "help me." (I used to share a room with my brother, who would wake me up from nightmares as a child, when I couldn't force myself awake.) For him to leave me there, trapped in the nightmare, at the mercy of horrible things that he probably couldn't even imagine, was so unthinkably sadistic that that incident was what finally proved to me that he was cruel enough to deserve my leaving him.

My current boyfriend almost crossed this line, too. I was hated by many because of having become a scapegoat in the process of defending myself and other sensitive people, and was suffering from severe anxiety because of it. I had a constant stress headache and the feeling of being stabbed under the ribs. I hadn't been sleeping, and was bursting into tears at random moments throughout the day. When I called my boyfriend because I was in desperate need of comforting, he was unwilling to be supportive or to even address my feelings. He said that I was probably just overreacting to something, and didn't even check it out to see who was in the wrong. I was devastated and ended up talking to Selene, in tears, on the phone instead. He was dependable and provided what I needed. Now I have fantasies about Selene sometimes. I think my relationship with my boyfriend has mostly recovered from it, but if we end up not making it as a couple, I will trace our failure back to this incident. It really is a love-killer for me. It's the "sin of omission" version of the " not respecting my boundaries and feelings" thing.


----------



## Who (Jan 2, 2010)

To be honest, I can't really think of anything that are absolute deal breakers. I can think of a few habits that turn me off, but even then there's still the hope that she can overcome them. Things like addictions, smoking, and swearing too much fall into that category. Racism and things of that nature is also a turn off, as I admire girls that have an open mind. There's also a few things that I don't quite mind on other people, but are things I would dislike in a romantic partner. I'd go into detail, but I don't really want to offend anyone since I know some of those things more than likely apply to some of the users here.


----------



## Shenis (Feb 4, 2010)

Low self-esteem, high-maintenance, emotionally loose (has a thing for other guys while dating someone), and I don't want to be with someone who isn't sure of who they are. It's a huge turn off for someone to think they are someone one day, and something completely different the next.


----------

