Deal Breaker in a Relationship

christmas2012

a deal breaker in a relationship for me is someone who is not serious and coasting in a realationship looking out for other options,while telling you they love you,bad hygiene,stingyness: definately,someone who constantly nit picks,critisises or is evasive and just has an over all bad manner,people who are negative or grumpy all the time.
looks wouldnt be a deal breaker but they would have to be clean and respectful at the very least,i wouldnt have a long list up to my arms of should nots,i think that is just being nit picky and shallow.

Giselle

Vestigial tails, and birthmarks in the pattern '666' are my no-no's. '665' is acceptable, but '667' is pushing it. I wouldn't exactly seek out a werewolf, but I wouldn't exclude him out of hand without getting to know him first.

I think most people are too fussy with lists of exclusions and absolutes.

I absolutely draw the line at dating agents of Lucifer though. I prefer a quiet life.

Galwayguy35

username123 wrote: »

A guy who was mad into any kind of tribal sport like rugby, soccer or GAA, something that there are tee shirts and songs for. Nothing wrong with it, just wouldnt interest me, the drinking culture that goes with it would also turn me off. (watching not playing one of those sports)
The notion that a match is more important than life events like someones wedding or a childs birthday or a holiday or weekend away just baffles me and I wouldnt be bothered with someone with that view.

Someone who views the local pub as an extension of their sitting room, somewhere to go alone and just chat to the 'lads' over a few pints, a few times a week or a place to drop into for no reason and just drink. Anyone who drank excessively though whether it be in the pub or at home.

Obviously racism, bigotry of any sort really, sexism, homophobia etc....

Someone who wasn't that intelligent. I need to be able to have intellectual conversations with my life partner.

Stinginess.

Any kind of aggressive or angry tendencies (I mean the type who'd pick a fight in a pub or with a stranger).

There are different forms of intelligence, in what way would we decide that someone is "stupid"?

Galwayguy35

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

There are different forms of intelligence, in what way would we decide that someone is "stupid"?

I think they pretty much explained it with the next sentence.

Galwayguy35

Deleted User wrote: »

I think they pretty much explained it with the next sentence.

And how did you work that out?
That describes someone that is interested in sport.

username123

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

And how did you work that out?
That describes someone that is interested in sport.

Im sorry if you dont understand what an intellectual conversation entails. Generally a conversation about politics, art, culture, philosophy etc... Something that requires a bit of basic intelligence to be able to discuss with any reasonable degree of articulation. The type of conversation a knuckle dragger would be a bit astounded at.

starlit

Having an intellectual conversation and it being articulate is enough for me. Not just anything random. Complex things like art, politics the economy and world stuff yes not just the same old general stuff.

Someone that can keep the conversation going and flow naturally I be more interested in that and share common ground with them being able to talk about stuff that not everyone else might.

From a woman's point of view of meeting lads, its hard not to meet fellas that haven't an interest in sport of some sort not all do but most have some kind of interest in sport what ever it is whether its a major or minor interest, hard not to meet a fella that has no interest in sport of any sort!? I've kind of gotten over the fact that they do its part of who they are if they into sport that is them its part of them and part of their interest/lifestyle.

Whether or not you have an interest shouldn't matter, if ye something to talk about great if not its interesting finding out and support him on it once it doesn't take away from his time too much though!

cantdecide

A tricky issue: letting oneself 'go' after starting a relationship...

Life's hard but to say that the time or pressure of A, B or C is a good reason to start shopping exclusively in Penneys or to start growing that beer belly is a bit much. I'm no Adonis but I think undertaking to make an effort for each other has to be a part of the picture.

Galwayguy35

cantdecide wrote: »

A tricky issue: letting oneself 'go' after starting a relationship...

Life's hard but to say that the time or pressure of A, B or C is a good reason to start shopping exclusively in Penneys or to start growing that beer belly is a bit much. I'm no Adonis but I think undertaking to make an effort for each other has to be a part of the picture.

Apart from that it's important to keep in shape for health reasons as well.

Obesity and heart disease go hand in hand.

mood

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Apart from that it's important to keep in shape for health reasons as well.

Obesity and heart disease go hand in hand.

You don't have to be overweight to get heart disease.

Also diabetes(type 2 and heart disease go hand in hand as both are diet related.

lazygal

Dealbreakers for me would be:
-Not wanting the same things out of life. I went out with guys who weren't into serious commitment. As I always wanted to get married and have a family (in that order) it was a waste of time for both parties.
-Not being considerate. I know some people aren't into cards or sentimental things, but I am, and my husband respects that and looks after me. I look after him too. The little things can be massive issues in a relationship if you don't deal with them.
-Lack of ambition/get up and go. You don't need to be the head of Apple or a world leader, but I've always been quite ambitious and combined work and study, so someone who wasn't interested in doing well or was happy coasting in a job without seeing any need to go further wouldn't appeal to me.

grames_bond

Can I just make a quick comment on something that was mentioned previously;

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with working in dunnes, it is a legit full time job with promotion opportunities with EVERY possibility of successfully having a great and rewarding quality of life.

To bring it back on topic - anyone who looks down their nose at someone who "just" works in dunnes......THAT is a dealbreaker for me!

the_syco

grames_bond wrote: »

To bring it back on topic - anyone who looks down their nose at someone who "just" works in dunnes......THAT is a dealbreaker for me!

Agreed. Heck, I cleaned the floors of a local Uni for a few months between full-time jobs.

username123

the_syco wrote: »

Agreed. Heck, I cleaned the floors of a local Uni for a few months between full-time jobs.

I worked in the local supermarket for 7 years during school and college. Customers who had gotten to know me over that time would joke with me that the supermarket had very high standards for the staff, cos they had me doing a degree. I subsequently moved onto my 'real' job, but Id have no problem going back and working in the supermarket. Theres no shame in any job.

JustAThought

Dealbreakers:
Smoking, Rotting teeth.

It would be nice if they had a similar temperature tolerance to me!!! I'm tired of the duvet on/off too hot/freezing thing!!!!
Long term it can really drag you down!

A non-snorer would be a L-T asset! It's hard to sustain nice& loving when you're permanently sleep deprived & narky :0

O;
And...gambler .I can forego sleep for years but definitely a gambler is a dealbreaker.

Or cloven feet. However pretty.

sky2424

Off the top of my head

Dislike: Someone whos lazy, stingy, treats other people badly, is dramatic needy or resentful.

Like: Someone with a 'sense of joie de vivre'....like randomly doing stuff just for the fun of it, not necessarily anything crazy but just someone whos not content sitting around all day doing nothing

RandolphEsq

Essentials; a bit ditzy but smart (not as smart as myself), not fat (as in big fat), some type of professional career.
Deal-breaker; obviously the opposite to the essentials listed above. Unable to cook (I can cook so I want her to cook for me also), makes me feel like she is emotionally dependent on me.

mood

RandolphEsq wrote: »

Essentials; a bit ditzy but smart (not as smart as myself), not fat (as in big fat), some type of professional career.
Deal-breaker; obviously the opposite to the essentials listed above. Unable to cook (I can cook so I want her to cook for me also), makes me feel like she is emotionally dependent on me.

Why would you not want to go out with someone as smart or smarter than you? Very odd!

hatrickpatrick

mood wrote: »

Why would you not want to go out with someone as smart or smarter than you? Very odd!

I suspect t's a bit like how watching the Inbetweeners always makes you fleetingly feel like a smooth talking legend

hatrickpatrick

As in the OP, independence is a huge thing for me. I want a girl to be with me because she likes my company and finds me attractive - not because she's dependent on me. A lot of people might immediately assume that's referring to money, but it actually applies pretty much across the board.
I'd rather she be with me because she wants[/] to be, not because she needs to be. Under that umbrella is not expecting to be with me literally 24/7 to the point where I start missing out on everything else and losing touch with people.

The amazing thing is, the whole concept of the 'overly attached girlfriend', as 4chan likes to put it, is such a universal stereotype, yet in my real life experience I know far more girls who claim their BFs are too possessive - so could it be that for some reason, cat people unwittingly gravitate towards dog people and vice versa?

floggg

Sounds shallow but I was on a date a while back and the guy mentioned something about being into Star Trek within the first 5 minutes.

He was an otherwise really nice guy but I knew in that instant things could never work out.

CastorTroy

floggg wrote: »

Sounds shallow but I was on a date a while back and the guy mentioned something about being into Star Trek within the first 5 minutes.

He was an otherwise really nice guy but I knew in that instant things could never work out.

So you're a Star Wars fan then?

Interests like that wouldn't bother me unless taken to the extreme. For example if he had turned up dressed a klingon and just spoke klingon the whole time, then I'd see your point.

If things like that bothered people, I would know a lot of guys who would be single due to the amount of crap like X Factor and Big Brother their girlfriends watch.

But to each their own, I suppose.

floggg

CastorTroy wrote: »

So you're a Star Wars fan then?

Interests like that wouldn't bother me unless taken to the extreme. For example if he had turned up dressed a klingon and just spoke klingon the whole time, then I'd see your point.

If things like that bothered people, I would know a lot of guys who would be single due to the amount of crap like X Factor and Big Brother their girlfriends watch.

But to each their own, I suppose.

No, I'm neither.

I don't mind anybody being into it, but I just know it wouldn't work. I couldn't fathom having to watch that sort of stuff.

I don't believe that you have to share each others hobbies and interest but there has to be a degree of compatibility. You need to be able to share each others interests, even if you don't necessarily enjoy them all that much yourself.

Des Carter

for me dealbreakers would include smokers, tattoos, drug habits, heavy drinkers (this can include girls with drinking problems or just girls that drink way to much and end up passing out or throwing up all the time on a night out). Also she would need to have some general cop-on, wouldn't be able to stand a daft or ditzy gf.

Finally for a bit of controversy I wouldn't go out with someone who had a history of being promiscuous. Ya I know, how backward of me but everyone to their own.

mood

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I suspect t's a bit like how watching the Inbetweeners always makes you fleetingly feel like a smooth talking legend

Needing/wanting to feel superior in a relationship is not good. I think someone who like that must be massively insecure.

username123

Des Carter wrote: »

Finally for a bit of controversy I wouldn't go out with someone who had a history of being promiscuous. Ya I know, how backward of me but everyone to their own.

Whats a history of being promiscuous? A virgin or just a lower number than you?
What about if she did everything but penetration with other guys? What if she wore slutty outfits but wouldnt put out?

Sorry Im teasing, but Im genuinely interested in knowing what you define as promiscuous?

JustAThought

username123 wrote: »

Des Carter wrote: »

Finally for a bit of controversy I wouldn't go out with someone who had a history of being promiscuous. Ya I know, how backward of me but everyone to their own.

Whats a history of being promiscuous? A virgin or just a lower number than you?
What about if she did everything but penetration with other guys? What if she wore slutty outfits but wouldnt put out?

Sorry Im teasing, but Im genuinely interested in knowing what you define as promiscuous?

Haha ;fair point!!
But, there's a thread where someone asks if it's "OK" to go out with a prostitute. And many do-goooders cheerlead him on.
From
My perspective " prostitute" or ex-prostitute falls into the category of promiscuous.
As does someone who behaves like one ; repeatedly dates & benefits from someone she's " not really into" for gain . Regardless of numerical value.
Somethin to do with values...

opinion guy

Anyone else hear that can of worms opening ?

floggg

JustAThought wrote: »

username123 wrote: »

Des Carter wrote: »

Finally for a bit of controversy I wouldn't go out with someone who had a history of being promiscuous. Ya I know, how backward of me but everyone to their own.

Whats a history of being promiscuous? A virgin or just a lower number than you?
What about if she did everything but penetration with other guys? What if she wore slutty outfits but wouldnt put out?

Sorry Im teasing, but Im genuinely interested in knowing what you define as promiscuous?

Haha ;fair point!!
But, there's a thread where someone asks if it's "OK" to go out with a prostitute. And many do-goooders cheerlead him on.
From
My perspective " prostitute" or ex-prostitute falls into the category of promiscuous.
As does someone who behaves like one ; repeatedly dates & benefits from someone she's " not really into" for gain . Regardless of numerical value.
Somethin to do with values...

Whether they are paid in cash money or other benefits in kind, a person who sleeps with somebody for material gain only is a prostitute.

I wouldn't mind going out with somebody who had played the field heavily before getting with me though, as long as that of we both agreed it was monogamous it remained that way.

Piliger

floggg wrote: »

Whether they are paid in cash money or other benefits in kind, a person who sleeps with somebody for material gain only is a prostitute.

I guess it makes you feel better when you can slap a nasty label on people you don't approve of.

If that were so - a huge part of the female population including all footballers an other celebs wives are prostitutes ... you don't think they marry those dicks for their personality do you ? :rolleyes: