By what criteria do you rule out potential significant others?

June 23, 2007 6:13 PM

By what criteria do you rule out potential significant others?

I have a hard time knowing by what criteria I should judge potential dates. I tend to value "feelings" over "reality." Unfortunately, reality tends to get more important as time goes on.

There have been times when I've started dating someone and realize early on that our life goals or lifestyles are different. Often this person is really attractive and fun, and I decide to give it a try based on these other qualities. For example, I have gone out on a couple of dates with someone who is a part-time musician. This inevitably means that he'll be traveling to different cities on many weekends and investing a lot of time and money in his band. I happen to be somewhat of a homebody and would like to date someone who is able to spend weekends with me much of the time. Yet I tell myself that I shouldn't rule him out because of this--what if he turns out to be an incredible guy??

For whatever reason, I seem to lack the discipline to make decisions based on these types of factors. Yet over time, these things can make or break a relationship, right?

I should mention that I'm not interested in dating casually. Ideally, I'm looking for someone to settle down with.

For those of you who are in the dating world (or remember when you were), how seriously do you take another's lifestyle and life goals into account when you first start dating? Besides for attractiveness, chemistry, and the usual, what other "reality" factors do you use to rule someone in/out?

posted by mintchip to Human Relations (11 answers total)

I tend to value "feelings" over "reality."

So does everyone else, no matter what they tell themselves.
posted by phrontist at 6:19 PM on June 23, 2007

Posting chatfilter to AxMe is a dealbreaker in a significant other.
posted by bshort at 6:23 PM on June 23, 2007

I say the world is well lost for love. Go with the feelings. Reality changes and there just aren't that many incredible guys to go around. (full disclosure-- haven't dated in 32 years, when I met my life mate. but I still say love trumps "goals" and "lifestyle.")
posted by nax at 6:25 PM on June 23, 2007

I understand what you're asking, and I had the same problem when I was dating. However, I solved it by doing the opposite of what you're asking...instead of looking for dealbreakers, I looked for the qualities I really need in a relationship. I actually made a list of five qualities I absolutely, positively had to have, plus qualities that I would like to have. Having a physical list to refer to made me avoid guys that I dated just because they were fun, or cute, or local. The first guy I dated after I made my list was the guy I eventually married. I've heard of other people using a list and they found spouses that way too.

I think that if you find someone who aligns with you in all the ways that are important to you, then you can deal with any potential dealbreakers aside from serious red flags such as abuse, heavy drug use, etc. It'll also help you not to settle or force things to work when it probably won't.

Sorry I kind of answered your question in the reverse of what you asked. Good luck!
posted by christinetheslp at 6:35 PM on June 23, 2007

I'm no longer a resident in the dating world, and I exited that place by being kind of cold-blooded about what I was and wasn't looking for. The way I explained it at the time, if a woman wasn't someone I would have been totally comfortable introducing to my entire extended family, I shouldn't be dating her. Thinking about it that way made sense for me because I get along great with my family; it was basically shorthand for "a person who has compatible values and habits and is good for me."

You don't need to use the "meet the family" criteria with your potential partners (especially if your family is awful), but I think if you are serious about settling down, you do need to find a way to mentally categorize people into "maybe's" and "definite no's," and not spend time dating people who, for whatever reason, are in the "no" category for you.

But I should also add that for me, I was much more interested in that person's interpersonal reality, as it were, rather than their job goals or whatever. I was looking for someone who was happy with themselves, who had friends, who got along as well as can be expected with their family, who would be loving and caring and considerate. Like christinetheslp I was looking more for positive attributes, rather than focusing on dealbreakers.
posted by Forktine at 6:41 PM on June 23, 2007

Hm, I have fairly decent friends so I just think "If I took this person to meet all of my friends, would they secretly be wondering why I was dating such an obvious loser?" (Not that I really always follow this rule, but every time I break it I end up kicking myself later over being so stupid.)
posted by anaelith at 6:41 PM on June 23, 2007

Do you have other potentials lined up? If not, exploring can be a great learning device.

I am happily settled down now, but dating a variety of people in the past was helpful in understanding more about myself and other people. Assuming there is no abuse and you're not missing out on anything else it seems like a great opportunity to get a new perspective.

To answer your question - the only thing that really puts me off is when a guy is mean or really selfish. Other than that, I just like chemistry!
posted by MiffyCLB at 6:46 PM on June 23, 2007

I have two criteria that I strictly adhere to.

1. Do they like me?
2. Did they ask me out?

I don't date anyone that doesn't meet at least one of those rules. I am still waiting but I am sure someone will eventually come along.
posted by Foam Pants at 7:02 PM on June 23, 2007

Breast size.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:15 PM on June 23, 2007

lying.

also, smoking cigarettes would be hard for me, just becaused i find that so unpleasant to be around.
posted by lgyre at 7:19 PM on June 23, 2007

Weekly church attendance is a deal breaker for me.

As is an actualized belief in creationism, astrology, or any other wacky-ass beliefs.
posted by andoatnp at 7:26 PM on June 23, 2007