All the single ladies ... and men

  • Thread starter Thread starter Elisabethelisa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ChemicalBean said:
For the men:

Green lights:
  • Devout Catholic ( > Mainline Protestant or Orthodox > Non-proselytizing other Christian)
  • Spiritual lifestyle (prayerful, mindful, contemplative, aesthetic awareness, attention to health and fitness, etc)
  • Humble. (Can take pride in work, relationships, accomplishments, appearance but not boastful or vain!)
  • Generous and grateful.
  • Loyal, faithful, trusting, and trustworthy.
  • Good citizen. Votes. Volunteers. Supports local business, schools, community life.
  • Intellectual and stimulating.
  • Deep listener. Tuned into other’s needs. Has own educated opinions, but entertains multiple viewpoints and seeks to grow.
  • Courteous and respectful in all relationships.
  • Diplomatic, tactful, polite.
  • Clean, tidy, hygenic, organized.
  • Self reliant…as in “still able to wash own laundry, fix own sandwich, open own beer”
  • Fiscally responsible (neither an excessive spender or penny-pincher)
  • Conversant and communicative.
  • Physically attractive. (I don’t care much about height, or coloration, or fashion style, or weight, but must try to present well!)
  • Intimate. (Physically, emotionally, spiritually, intellectually.)
Bonuses: Musical. Language-lover. Artistic. Foodie. Traveler. Technically-saavy. Mechancially-handy. Outdoor adventurer.

Red flags:
  • Anti-Catholic, anti-religious or apathetic.
  • Arrogance. Egoism. Hubris.
  • Anti-feminist. Fixation with idealized or traditional gender roles.
  • Anti-intellectual.
  • Anti-musical.
  • Minimalist. (Freaks out at the stuff I have, mostly books and instruments. I keep it clean, organized, useable, and out-of-the-way if you’ll let me be 🙂
  • Slobby living.
  • Slovenly appearance.
  • Macho.
  • Drunkard OR teetoller.
  • Disrespectful or demanding.
  • Greedy.
  • Suspicious.
  • Vengeful.
  • Fiscally irresponsible.
  • Intolerant of diverse perspectives, argument for sport, or disagreement of conscience.
  • Self-proclaimed “orthodox” or “political conservative”. (I’ll give it a shot, but we will passionately disagree.)
  • Not supportive, communicative, or intimate.
  • Not open to children in this marriage.
  • Children from prior marriages or relationships. Toxic ex’s.
  • Criminal record.
  • Setting out to change me.
Click to expand...
Not to be a wet blanket but there are potential inconsistencies there. Not hard, outright inconsistencies, but all of your expected tendencies can be hard to reconcile within the personality of one man. For example, you mix an artsy personality with not only tidiness but outright being organised. Or the tough outdoorsy survivor with diplomatic tact and actually not being a self-described conservative… which is already at least has the appearance of being a little at odds with your community-centred and a little statist notion of being a good citizen. In fact, even the combination of linguistic aptitude with tech-savvy and mechanical aptitude is relatively rare to be found outside the CIA. And mechanicians with a penchant for cleanliness are just scary. Just saying.
 
Sarcelle said:
With the family under assault and divorce more prevalent it’s hard to grow from childhood to adulthood open, trusting and uncorrupted. Imagine being a young girl living with her mother and her never ending parade of boyfriends. Add to that a culture who pressures children to have sex as early as possible. Face it, innocence and purity are on the endangered list in this society.
Click to expand...
Of course they are. Another reason to treasure them and oppose their derision or a cynical attitude about them. Nothing has changed in comparison to the Roman Empire except maybe for the better, actually. This is old, very old.

A possibly remote connection here is that the Scripture calls us to be like children. Which does not mean infantile or failing to exercise roles appropriate to a grown age (vide St. Paul) but it does mean struggling to refind that “lost” innocence. Uncorrupt people or at least ostensible significant freedom from corruption can be found in surprising places. It basically means someone who lives his or her life without burnout.
 
exoflare said:
I don’t think he’d be getting all this flak if it were just “obedience” on its own. It was, however, the combination of that with the 3 other words I highlighted earlier that started raising some eyebrows.
Click to expand...
Right, because if a man falls in love with the one woman who doesn’t participate in the Ego Wars, it means he’s an Edward Cullen. :rolleyes: (Would’ve said that but that would be leaving out a lot and give people the false illusion that such a standard is cakewalk.)

I’ll stick to being confused with Harry Potter thanks.
chevalier said:
But stay away from master-house maid associations. I am honestly sensing that in how you speak about those things, even with a fair share of benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...
Hehehehe. Makes for a fine ruse though. “Who is the master and who is the servant?” 😉
 
Elisabethelisa said:
I saw this question on CM back when I tried online dating…and I thought it would be interesting to post it here too. So…

1- What turns you on in your quest of Mr or Mrs Right?
2- What turns you off?

It’s time to be honest y’all. 🙂
Click to expand...
Green lights would be a love for animals and living in the country (that’s a big non-negotiable for me), and not turned off by farm-freshness. He has to have a job as well

A huge red flag is someone who doesn’t love animals, and has to live in the city, and doesn’t have job or jumps from job to job.

Everything else is negotiable. But these are just the beginning. I won’t even go on a first date with someone with the red flags…
 
severus68 said:
If obedience is an act of love, what does it say about the husband who demands obedience?

Yes, Blessed JPII put it nicely and in context. It is the obedience of the Church to Christ. For husbands and wives, it is about mutual submission.
Click to expand...
It actually goes both ways. I’ve met women who demand obedience from their husbands. If obedience is an act of love, then what you described is not obedience but coercion and slavery disguised as obedience.

The obedience of the Son to Father, of the Handmaid to her Lord, and of the Church to Christ, should always be the model for husbands and wives.

I agree that it should be a mutual submission. 🙂
 
chevalier said:
Not to be a wet blanket but there are potential inconsistencies there. Not hard, outright inconsistencies, but all of your expected tendencies can be hard to reconcile within the personality of one man. For example, you mix an artsy personality with not only tidiness but outright being organised. Or the tough outdoorsy survivor with diplomatic tact and actually not being a self-described conservative… which is already at least has the appearance of being a little at odds with your community-centred and a little statist notion of being a good citizen. In fact, even the combination of linguistic aptitude with tech-savvy and mechanical aptitude is relatively rare to be found outside the CIA. And mechanicians with a penchant for cleanliness are just scary. Just saying.
Click to expand...
Haha. Never thought of it that way. Most of what you mention were “bonus points” 🙂

Maybe I was thinking of an architect personality…appreciative of both form and function…creative, yet tidy…technical, with personality. I need a well-balanced person who can use “both brains”. It’s okay to get absorbed in strategy and problem-solving, just come up for air! It’s okay to make a mess, just always clean up after yourself! I love artsy, can do without the “fartsy”.

Perhaps by “outdoor adventurer” I mean someone who would travel, canoe, skydive, ski, explore nature together. I don’t need a Tarzan or a Rambo. Guns are deal-breakers. And at the end of the day I still need to squeeze my Charmin, not sawdust and corncobs. (Unless he wants to install a bidet…)

Also, tact is 100% independent of politics. But yes, I prefer a progressive mindset. Shop locally and domestically-made when possible. Promote policies that protect the dignity, opportunity, and wealth of all people, not just the privileged. The best solutions benefit the community and the individual.
 
choliks said:
It actually goes both ways. I’ve met women who demand obedience from their husbands.
Click to expand...
OMDB. (Over my dead body.)
If obedience is an act of love, then what you described is not obedience but coercion and slavery disguised as obedience.
Click to expand...
Obedience is connected with some sort of hierarchical relationship, even a temporary or light one, but always one that entitles somebody to make binding decisions for the rest. There is no “obedience” without such a relationship. “Submission” is the more proper term for spontaneously conceding.
 
ChemicalBean said:
Haha. Never thought of it that way. Most of what you mention were “bonus points” 🙂
Click to expand...
Still! They reflect “soft expectations”, things you’d like to see but for some reason can’t really demand. 😉 They can shape your perception of men and perhaps put them in an uncomfortable position being vaguely acceptable while very far from your ideal and somewhat below you desired reasonable minimum of comfort. Which position is very humiliating to be in. Were I to find myself there, I’d encourage the concerned lady to keep looking past me.
Maybe I was thinking of an architect personality…appreciative of both form and function…creative, yet tidy…technical, with personality. I need a well-balanced person who can use “both brains”. It’s okay to get absorbed in strategy and problem-solving, just come up for air!
Click to expand...
I see. Well, I know two guys who know both dead languages and programming languages. (That’d be me and the other dude who went to the same school but anyway). My father would actually pretty much cover all of it. But it’s rare. Bar a couple of improbable combinations rationalised by a particular life story, the stuff tends to be hard to reconcile. But that’s okay, I guess. After all, I like both blondes and redheads and last time I checked we were only allowed to pick one. In other words, you may just need to pick with awareness that you’re dealing with more of an “either/or” situation than simply 6 out of 10 (or any other numbers). Also, people don’t get their personalities so moderated, their eminent traits aren’t softened around the edges in such a way. There’s no such thing as ideal balance, not even among most of the saints. It is theoretically imaginable and the imagination may feel realistic, even tangible, but it isn’t really.
It’s okay to make a mess, just always clean up after yourself!
Click to expand...
“Tomorrow! What’s for dinner?”
I love artsy, can do without the “fartsy”.
Click to expand...
Being the son of a painter & sculptor (and whatever other things dad does or has done, that being quite a long list), I have a hard time imagining an artist’s house tidy. Okay, no obvious disrepair. No spills allowed to fester. No books on the floor. Whatever needs to be done, he gets it done (usually without an explosion). But “neat” is the last word I’d use. As much as exceptions exist, artists aren’t exactly people known for their perfect organisation. Especially the ones that work with physical materials and not a computer screen. Expect things like books everywhere, musical instruments on the place, heavy scents in the kitchen with some stuff hanging from the beam, an impressive array of old stuff half of which you don’t know the use for, and cats all over the place. And by the plural in “cats”, I don’t mean “two” (or the preclusion of other animals for that matter).

Sometimes it’s like in services sector: you can have it done well, fast or for cheap. Pick any two of the three. Which means that two is doable but with the third a “soft inconcistency” starts, meaning it’s theoretically possible but not very likely because it’s odd and runs against normal human experience. Artsy, technical, organised etc., sound like an “any x of y” thing, it’s a little similar with the brain a guy would need to have to process both arts and sciences (which is already relatively hard) but then also arts and some other stuff. It doesn’t require a genius, a true polymath, it could be found a notch or two below but even people nearing on the genius range (the ordinary smart and brilliant people) have a hard time spanning across so many fields.
Perhaps by “outdoor adventurer” I mean someone who would travel, canoe, skydive, ski, explore nature together. I don’t need a Tarzan or a Rambo.
Click to expand...
Well. There are women who are essentially after a Tarzan with a Ph.D. Then again, there probably are Tarzans with Ph.D. And perhaps a couple of them don’t have their ID classified by the CIA. 😉
Guns are deal-breakers. And at the end of the day I still need to squeeze my Charmin, not sawdust and corncobs. (Unless he wants to install a bidet…)
Click to expand...
Well, I guess you could spend a little time thinking just how important it is to you that he should install it personally, rather than being the guy who brought in the pay check and called the professionals to fix it (himself being a professional in a different field, e.g. car mechanics, medicine, history teaching, whatever).
Also, tact is 100% independent of politics.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the radical left!
But yes, I prefer a progressive mindset. Shop locally and domestically-made when possible.
Click to expand...
That’s 18th century hardcore conservative, actually, but to each his own! I’m constantly amazed by the oldness of ideas people refer to as progressive and the novelty of some conservative positions. Generally, for every position, you can find an even-more-conservative position and that just can be held by some guy on the left. For example, democracy was the conservative option in 11th century Sweden when they introduced feudalism. Oh joys of politics.
Promote policies that protect the dignity, opportunity, and wealth of all people, not just the privileged. The best solutions benefit the community and the individual.
Click to expand...
I still choke on my imported whisky when I hear “progressive”!

(General point being that under the law of total probability, the more mutually independent expectations you make, the smaller the pool becomes. And the less the probability of some of those expectations being actually met at the same time, the still smaller the pool. This may leave you with a very small pool for reasons that could be avoided with some categorisation and rationalisation. Pardon my French.)
 
choliks said:
It actually goes both ways. I’ve met women who demand obedience from their husbands. If obedience is an act of love, then what you described is not obedience but coercion and slavery disguised as obedience.

The obedience of the Son to Father, of the Handmaid to her Lord, and of the Church to Christ, should always be the model for husbands and wives.

I agree that it should be a mutual submission. 🙂
Click to expand...
Great,:)👍
 
Crescentinus said:
What do you mean? Have you read my list? o:
Click to expand...
Yes. I mean the emphasis on “weird”. People with “weird” lists (or who make a point of trying to appear weird to others) have themselves to blame when they remain single forever. For the record, your list does not actually look weird, no matter what you say.
 
chevalier said:
Yes. I mean the emphasis on “weird”. People with “weird” lists (or who make a point of trying to appear weird to others) have themselves to blame when they remain single forever. For the record, your list does not actually look weird, no matter what you say.
Click to expand...
Really? My list is not weird? How?
 
Crescentinus said:
Really? My list is not weird? How?
Click to expand...
You insist on being weird. Stop doing that. There is nothing prestigious or elevating in being “weird”. It doesn’t endear you to people or make you grow in their eyes. It only creates a certain awkwardness that makes getting along more difficult. It could be making things more difficult in your relations with girls too.

As for your list, it reflects a normal, well-adjusted girl. There’s nothing weird in that.
 
chevalier said:
You insist on being weird. Stop doing that. There is nothing prestigious or elevating in being “weird”. It doesn’t endear you to people or make you grow in their eyes. It only creates a certain awkwardness that makes getting along more difficult. It could be making things more difficult in your relations with girls too.

As for your list, it reflects a normal, well-adjusted girl. There’s nothing weird in that.
Click to expand...
Anything to add Exoflare?? A little : booom! Maybe?! 🙂
 
I’m laughing but Chevalier is right though! If you’re so sure your list is weird you should definitely work on it to make it better(?). But to me there is nothing weird on it only your attitude is weird here.
 
chevalier said:
You insist on being weird. Stop doing that. There is nothing prestigious or elevating in being “weird”. It doesn’t endear you to people or make you grow in their eyes. It only creates a certain awkwardness that makes getting along more difficult. It could be making things more difficult in your relations with girls too.

As for your list, it reflects a normal, well-adjusted girl. There’s nothing weird in that.
Click to expand...
You have a point.
Sadly, my standards would be seen as somewhat archaic at best by secularist standards. :o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top