Too fussy

LegacyUser

Female, early 30's. After being single for the best part of 4 years, and the pool of eligible men ever-diminishing (settled down/emigrated/players), am beginning to realise that I'm hankering after the unreachable dream!
I'm talking about meeting someone attractive, intelligent, good job, good relationship with friends& family, ect ect. Who's going to tick all these boxes, emotional& practical?
I don't even tick them all myself!
So folks, advice please, have you knowingly comprimised, if so on what?
Regrets, lessons learned?

meeeeh

I didn't have to compromise but I also didn't have a list. One person is not just a list of criteria that need to be ticked off. It's the one that feels right despite not being the best looking or richest man in the room.

I'll do a bit of generalization here but sometimes women or men go for a person they think others would like and not the one they would like.

Neyite

valvalen wrote: »

Female, early 30's. After being single for the best part of 4 years, and the pool of eligible men ever-diminishing (settled down/emigrated/players), am beginning to realise that I'm hankering after the unreachable dream!
I'm talking about meeting someone attractive, intelligent, good job, good relationship with friends& family, ect ect. Who's going to tick all these boxes, emotional& practical?
I don't even tick them all myself!
So folks, advice please, have you knowingly comprimised, if so on what?
Regrets, lessons learned?

I dont think there is much wrong with your list, though if you are too dismissive too quickly or have too narrow a view of what might constitute a good job for instance you might be restricting yourself. I myself dropped my list and limited it to a few criteria: I wanted someone I was attracted to (as opposed to him just being attractive) who is kind, and who treated me with respect. I also dont sweat the small stuff, neither of us do.

If he is generally kind, then he will have good friendships and family relationship. Though my partner would do anything for anyone, he also is nobodys fool either. He treats me with respect, but that's because I treat him the same way. We never shout or call names in an argument as that serves no purpose.

You dont have to tick all the boxes in order to want them ticked for you, but similarly I feel that you cant ask someone to think higher of you than you do yourself. If you dont love yourself how can you expect a stranger to?

CathyMoran

I had a long list and the person that I am married to is someone that was ticked a lot of the list but also had some things that I said I would never go near (he is slightly below 6ft and he was not originallly studying IT), looking back my list was silly I accept - if someone is kind, makes you laugh and you can really get on with then that is a good start.

Queen-Mise

valvalen wrote: »

Female, early 30's. After being single for the best part of 4 years, and the pool of eligible men ever-diminishing (settled down/emigrated/players), am beginning to realise that I'm hankering after the unreachable dream!
I'm talking about meeting someone attractive, intelligent, good job, good relationship with friends& family, ect ect. Who's going to tick all these boxes, emotional& practical?
I don't even tick them all myself!
So folks, advice please, have you knowingly comprimised, if so on what?
Regrets, lessons learned?

IMO - that list is ridiculous.

Liking someone and being attracted to them is first (you can't go anywhere without it:D)

For me - respect, kindness, humour - come in second. Brains would also be important - but not necessarily with the same interests.

A good job wouldn't be as important for me - because interests are equally as important. For example, someone in a dead end job, could be running a club/society with a large budget. And be happy in their job as their interests is the thing that is important in their life. I would look at the broader professional view.

What is important - & is hard to pin down: is an attitude to rearing, society etc. It is hard to rear kids, for example, if you both have radically different views in some of these areas.

Good relationships with family/friends as you said is a minefield. My husband's family are horrid at times - but I didn't marry them, we deliberately live over 50 miles away from them:D

Call Me Jimmy

Jesus Christ

Mod

Call me Jimmy, if you're not going to constructively contribute, don't post.

An Bhanríon

Found myself long term single in my early thirties. Finally admitted that I was being too fussy waiting for 'Mr Perfect' to turn up. So I dated a few guys that I wouldn't normally date in a fit.

I was convinced I would have to compromise, because like you I felt all the good ones were taken. But no, in the middle of dating all these guys I really wasn't interested in, I found my 'one in a million' - a man who makes me smile every day. And I make him smile a lot too!

It's not about ticking boxes, though. It's about finding the person that has the same general outlook as you and that you can have fun with. Somebody you can relax with and don't feel you need to put on a show all the time. And of course somebody you're attracted to!!

Ditch the list and take a few risks. You never know where it might bring you!

Call Me Jimmy

Ok

valvalen wrote: »

I don't even tick them all myself!?

Nobody does, that's part of the reason that using the box-ticking method for a potential relationship is a waste of time.

Just a suggestion but try gauging rapport and your level of attraction to the person, then when it comes to the point of 'does he tick all the boxes?' just say 'I'm not sure but this is a great feeling at the moment'.

Mr_Spaceman

What does a "good job" mean anyway? So you can be spoiled?

Some people enjoy their work but it might not necessarily be well-paid. Are they struck off the list?

In fact, how about just a job?

LegacyUser

Thanks for the replies so far, though it took me a few years to realise but I'd already established that the list was a no go, so no need for any further confirmation on that

It's unfair to say I want to meet someone with a good job so I can be spoiled. I work and earn enough money to spoil myself, I don't need or want a man to buy me things or fund my lifestyle, or rely on in any way financially. I meant "good job" in the sense that the guy would be able to fend for himself, in a general way, and have a college education, like I do. I don't think that's overly unreasonable or demanding.

Going on lots of dates, checking out views on raising a family, not conforming to other peoples views on who you should find attractive.....all good points& thank you.

Stheno

valvalen wrote: »

Thanks for the replies so far, though it took me a few years to realise but I'd already established that the list was a no go, so no need for any further confirmation on that

It's unfair to say I want to meet someone with a good job so I can be spoiled. I work and earn enough money to spoil myself, I don't need or want a man to buy me things or fund my lifestyle, or rely on in any way financially. I meant "good job" in the sense that the guy would be able to fend for himself, in a general way, and have a college education, like I do. I don't think that's overly unreasonable or demanding.

Going on lots of dates, checking out views on raising a family, not conforming to other peoples views on who you should find attractive.....all good points& thank you.

I don't have a college education but have lots of work related qualifications and would be considered relatively successful in my career. Lots of people, in fact the vast majority, who meet me in any capacity related to my ability/experience, assume I do have one. I read a huge amount of both fiction and non fiction, industry related articles, contribute with my own opinions,and keep well on top of current affairs and news. A lot of people with college educations do not, or cannot do some of the above. In my current peer group of twenty or so I am the only person not to have at least a primary degree, and it has never bothered me, or them.

Stop limiting yourself.

seenitall

Stheno wrote: »

Stop limiting yourself.

Oh, come on.

If I had posted here saying that I'd like to meet someone of a particular religious group or whatever, as I belonged to the same (for example), how would you view a person from some other religious group posting, saying that I'm limiting myself, as they themselves are such a lovely specimen of their chosen religious group?

We all have preferences in life, things that influence our choices to a greater or a lesser degree, and viewing those preferences as limitations that are going to lead to some negative result is just a matter of perspective; her preference needn't negatively impact the OP at all, in fact for all we know it might lead to a more compatible match than it would otherwise be.

Call Me Jimmy

I just don't understand how judging on the basis od a college degree will help in finding someone.

seenitall

Well I don't understand how judging on the basis of the ability to cook well, or on the basis of having lots of money, or on the basis of the belief in a beardy man in the sky, will help find someone. Yet some people do, and as far as they are concerned they are not limiting themselves, they are just exercising their preferences. Which is their right.

D1stant

CathyMoran wrote: »

I had a long list and the person that I am married to is someone that was ticked a lot of the list but also had some things that I said I would never go near (he is slightly below 6ft and he was not originallly studying IT), looking back my list was silly I accept - if someone is kind, makes you laugh and you can really get on with then that is a good start.

I kind of get the height thing...just., but has to study IT?

I cant believe someone would be this narrow minded

seenitall

D1stant wrote: »

I cant believe someone would be this narrow minded

What a timely post.

A preference is no more narrow-mindedness than it is a limitation.

(It can also sometimes be abandoned if the trade-off is GOOD, fortunately for Mr. CathyMoran. )

Stheno

seenitall wrote: »

Oh, come on.

If I had posted here saying that I'd like to meet someone of a particular religious group or whatever, as I belonged to the same (for example), how would you view a person from some other religious group posting, saying that I'm limiting myself, as they themselves are such a lovely specimen of their chosen religious group?

We all have preferences in life, things that influence our choices to a greater or a lesser degree, and viewing those preferences as limitations that are going to lead to some negative result is just a matter of perspective; her preference needn't negatively impact the OP at all, in fact for all we know it might lead to a more compatible match than it would otherwise be.

Come on yourself, comparing having a college education to following a particular reglious belief? I've heard it all now!

I'm agnostic, my partner is a practicing Catholic, he's got a degree, I don't.

Fine if you are a very orthodox Christian, but OP hasn't mentioned it.
Instead their posts are very clearly geared imo towards their perception of what the "ideal" partner should be and what the "minimum" qualifications for that partner should be.

OP may perhaps be Prince William having second thoughts about Kate?

Seriously though, having a third level qualification as a criteria for choosing to see someone as a potential partner?

OP needs to get over herself. As from your post, do you. It's not as if I've told a PHD not to consider a manual worker, who in this day and age, may well be highly educated anyway.

When I met my current partner after a few months of chatting on the web, I thought he was too short, didn't work in an industry I admire, was full of himself regarding history, had kids, was older than I imagined myself being with, was too thin, to name but a few.

But you know what? We'd clicked and four and a half years later, are a happy couple, and build on our relationship bit by bit, lots of mutual support, help, and kindness, and we genuinely feel we have a future.

If you'd asked him when he met me, I was too career focussed (still am), too smart, intimidating, fussy, and very self contained and unwilling to share.

Somehow we got through all of those issues, and are very happy now.

seenitall

Stheno wrote: »

Come on yourself, comparing having a college education to following a particular reglious belief? I've heard it all now!

I'm agnostic, my partner is a practicing Catholic, he's got a degree, I don't.

Fine if you are a very orthodox Christian, but OP hasn't mentioned it.
Instead their posts are very clearly geared imo towards their perception of what the "ideal" partner should be and what the "minimum" qualifications for that partner should be.

OP may perhaps be Prince William having second thoughts about Kate?

Seriously though, having a third level qualification as a criteria for choosing to see someone as a potential partner?

OP needs to get over herself. As from your post, do you. It's not as if I've told a PHD not to consider a manual worker, who in this day and age, may well be highly educated anyway.

Why so aggressive, Stheno? Has a nerve been touched?

Yes, comparing college education to a religious belief, what's so mad about that? Both are life choices, both are IMO equally valid criteria for looking for compatibility. You haven't really explained why they wouldn't be?

William, Kate... you lost me there?

Stheno

seenitall wrote: »

Why so aggressive, Stheno? Has a nerve been touched?

Yes, comparing college education to a religious belief, what's so mad about that? Both are life choices, both are IMO equally valid criteria for looking for compatibility. You haven't really explained why they wouldn't be?

William, Kate... you lost me there?

No religious belief is a fundamental lifestyle choice, education is not.
I'm never going to go out with an Amish, Orthodox Jewish, Catholic or Muslim person as I am not religious, and couldn't live the lifestyle they ask for, yet I work with people of all of those backgrounds regardless of their religion.

It's a very core part of peoples lives, but education is not

seenitall

Stheno wrote: »

No religious belief is a fundamental lifestyle choice, education is not.
I'm never going to go out with an Amish, Orthodox Jewish, Catholic or Muslim person as I am not religious, and couldn't live the lifestyle they ask for, yet I work with people of all of those backgrounds regardless of their religion.

It's a very core part of peoples lives, but education is not

Education is as much 'a core part' of a person's life as they want it to be. A person has as much right to have this as a preference for their partner, as they have about wanting someone to believe in some fictitious deity along with them, and not be looked down on for that.

Stheno

seenitall wrote: »

Education is as much 'a core part' of a person's life as they want it to be. A person has as much right to have this as a preference for their partner, as they have about wanting someone to believe in some fictitious deity along with them, and not be looked down on for that.

They do not. I live with a semi religious person and am happy to accept that.
However some forms of belief impose severe lifestyle restrictions that I would never consider acceptable, no education I've come across decrees how I should live my daily life.

OP is simply being an intellectual snob by omitting those without a college education and not considering that they may be educated to or above the level of a primary degree.

That's significantly different from someone with fundamental religious beliefs imo.

seenitall

Stheno wrote: »

They do not. I live with a semi religious person and am happy to accept that.
However some forms of belief impose severe lifestyle restrictions that I would never consider acceptable, no education I've come across decrees how I should live my daily life.

OP is simply being an intellectual snob by omitting those without a college education and not considering that they may be educated to or above the level of a primary degree.

That's significantly different from someone with fundamental religious beliefs imo.

No; they do not in your opinion. You keep talking about severe lifestyle restrictions imposed by religions, what's with that? How is that relevant? You'd never consider some things like that acceptable for yourself, yet you want the OP to consider what you deem acceptable for her? How about the things that she deems acceptable for her? Ah, no; when it comes to that, she is an intellectual snob.

We are getting to the heart of the matter with the "intellectual snob" bit.

My opinion is that you are simply being judgmental about a very simple, straightforward, non-controversial preference on the part of the op, as you are somehow taking it personally. In reality, the difference between placements of value on the two social products/constructs that are education and religion, in terms of choosing a partner, is non-existant.

southsiderosie

I think what strikes a nerve with the degree thing is that there seems to be an implicit assumption that because someone has a degree that they are intelligent (or at least more intelligent that someone who doesn't). But having a degree doesn't necessarily mean that you are smart or interesting or share some set of universal values, it just means that you finished college. So it seems like a very imperfect 'box' on a checklist.

beks101

I don't think there's anything wrong with expecting a lot from a potential partner. It's about valuing yourself and your time really, knowing what it is you need to see in someone else that makes it worth your while taking that leap of faith.

I don't think those things should necessarily translate to a laundry list, but I think after a certain amount of dating, you do have to become pragmatic about things. I'm certainly a more cautious and measured person when it comes to matters of the heart today than I would have been even a year ago, and that's because I let my attraction for someone overlook a lot of areas of incompatibility that ultimately led to a lot of heartache. So I have certain areas that I won't overlook again that are personal to me, just as things like ambition or education or kindness or being family-oriented might be personal preferences to somebody else.

I don't think that's being "too fussy" though, it's being smart, learning from past experiences and striving for the best for yourself, why shouldn't you? If it's at the point where you've formed a mental check list in your head & are eliminating people at the drop of a hat, it's probably time to re-evaluate.

And it is important to keep an open mind. You can find love anywhere really if you're truly open to it.

CathyMoran

D1stant wrote: »

I kind of get the height thing...just., but has to study IT?

I cant believe someone would be this narrow minded

It turned out that the IT thing was because I really wanted to study it and did in the end...

My husband and I have been through a lot and one of the things that has got us through all of this is that we both share the same strong sense of humour and we both are very stubborn.

Looks are the first thing people go for in may cases but you can learn to love someone for who they are. It is all about balance. One thing that I do feel is very important is kindness because without that there is nothing.

seenitall

southsiderosie wrote: »

I think what strikes a nerve with the degree thing is that there seems to be an implicit assumption that because someone has a degree that they are intelligent (or at least more intelligent that someone who doesn't). But having a degree doesn't necessarily mean that you are smart or interesting or share some set of universal values, it just means that you finished college. So it seems like a very imperfect 'box' on a checklist.

Well, as you say yourself, it is an assumption in many people's minds, but one which many others do not share. I certainly don't, I think that wouldn't be very intelligent of me.

The OP may simply be looking from the similar or shared background point of view, similar to the way many people are inclined to want to marry within or around their own communities, for example.

For myself, I think as a box, one way or the other, it is pretty trivial (I married a guy who left school at 15).

However, I also think the OP has a right to make it her preference in a partner if she so wishes, without being told to get over herself, on this thread, or anywhere at all.

We may not agree with her choices for whatever reasons we may have or assume, but have we the right to judge her like that?

There is a big difference between having a preference for something in a potential partner or something that is a MUST HAVE in a potential partner.

eviltwin

Its okay to have standards but you need to be realistic too.

I'm married to a guy I've been dating since I was 18, back then I didn't have any standards just that he was a decent bloke who made me laugh. I fell in love with love with him because of that.

I often think if I met him now I wouldn't date him because we are very different in a lot of ways - he'd say the same about me - but its no barrier to love. If anything it keeps us on our toes I'd hate to think I'd have missed out on the love of my life and the most amazing man I know because of some bar I had.

As others have said a partner isn't a set of ticks you make. Wouldn't it be sad to turn down someone who could be an incredible partner because he doesn't have the right kind of job or looks a certain way?

clairefontaine

I would settle for being understood. A lot harder to come by than you would think.

seenitall

eviltwin wrote: »

As others have said a partner isn't a set of ticks you make. Wouldn't it be sad to turn down someone who could be an incredible partner because he doesn't have the right kind of job or looks a certain way?

Agreed.

But at the same time, everyone is different.

Some people are more amenable to social or character or any other kind of differences, than others.

Some people believe that once you meet 'the one', the checklist goes out the window post haste.

Some people never ever find the right partner, as the checklist is just too important and never gets ticked to the full,

and some people regret their partner choices and long to be able to turn back time so that they could devise a robust checklist and stick to it.

It takes all kinds, with all kinds of experiences; that's why I don't think it's a good idea for us to be telling each other who's too fussy, who isn't and how it's likely to work out - one can't tell who someone on boards.ie really is in their entirety as a human being, what they think, how they feel, let alone who they will be at some point in the future. Therefore it is futile to think any general answer over some checklist or other will bring a perfect match any closer.

After all, everyone knows themselves best.

clairefontaine

southsiderosie wrote: »

I think what strikes a nerve with the degree thing is that there seems to be an implicit assumption that because someone has a degree that they are intelligent (or at least more intelligent that someone who doesn't). But having a degree doesn't necessarily mean that you are smart or interesting or share some set of universal values, it just means that you finished college. So it seems like a very imperfect 'box' on a checklist.

Not necessarily. It could also mean that person will have better job prospects.

It could also mean avoiding any chip on the shoulder resentments from someone who doesn't have one when you do because there is a built in inequality. A BA is not what it used to be. If this were someone saying they would prefer to be with someone who had a high school diploma or leaving cert, I doubt they would be name called an intellectual snob, yet a BA now is what a HS Diploma/leaving cert used to be.

Mr_Spaceman

Somehow I find the idea of some people possessing, in all seriousness, a 'tick list' for potential partners all rather depressing.

Life is imperfect. People are imperfect. We're never going to get everything we want.

None of us can be all things to all men. Or, indeed, women.

How about just having a relaxed attitude, going with the flow and not being so quick to judge?

jaffacakesyum

Mr_Spaceman wrote: »

Somehow I find the idea of some people possessing, in all seriousness, a 'tick list' for potential partners all rather depressing.

Life is imperfect. People are imperfect. We're never going to get everything we want.

None of us can be all things to all men. Or, indeed, women.

How about just having a relaxed attitude, going with the flow and not being so quick to judge?

Thing is, I don't think (or I would hope anyway) that women or men with a 'tick list' are dismissing people they meet in everyday life or go on a date with, when there is clear and obvious chemistry. Say somebody usually would look for a man with a college education (as this has been brought up in this thread) but goes for drinks with a guy, he's drop dead gorgeous, charming, sparks are flying, they have lots in common, he appears to be an intelligent bloke, I doubt the woman is going to never see him again despite obvious mutual attraction just because he doesn't have a college education.

That said, the woman has every right to have a preference for men with college education as it is obviously deemed an important trait to her.

I would be quite fussy and I probably have a checklist in my head about what traits my ideal partner would have. That's not to say if I meet someone and sparks fly, I won't throw that list out the window.

I think you're right, that the best option is to just go with the flow and see. But if someone's a really nice guy and you get on well with him, a fair bit in comon, great sense of humour etc. but through conversation you find out he's on the dole and doesn't plan on finding a job anytime soon, he lives at home with his parents and has no wish to move out soon etc. etc. but he's still a "nice guy", why should a woman "give him a chance and go with the flow" if she is looking for someone with ambition, independence, able to provide for himself etc.?

Some things are important and I don't think women, or men, are being too fussy by having a list of ideal traits. But as I said above, that's not to say that you won't meet someone who you instantly click with despite not ticking all the boxes.

meeeeh

southsiderosie wrote: »

I think what strikes a nerve with the degree thing is that there seems to be an implicit assumption that because someone has a degree that they are intelligent (or at least more intelligent that someone who doesn't). But having a degree doesn't necessarily mean that you are smart or interesting or share some set of universal values, it just means that you finished college. So it seems like a very imperfect 'box' on a checklist.

This. My partners IQ is in 140-150 bracket according to Mensa. He got kicked out of two universities and has no degree. Some of the smartest people I know have problems with the constrains of educational system. On the other hand plenty of idiots manage to get through college.

eviltwin

meeeeh wrote: »

This. My partners IQ is in 140-150 bracket according to Mensa. He got kicked out of two universities and has no degree. Some of the smartest people I know have problems with the constrains of educational system. On the other hand plenty of idiots manage to get through college.

+1

My husband never went to college despite getting all A's in his Leaving. He just wasn't into it. Its a shame to see some people write him off as being dumb because he's the only one in his family who never went.

clairefontaine

meeeeh wrote: »

This. My partners IQ is in 140-150 bracket according to Mensa. He got kicked out of two universities and has no degree. Some of the smartest people I know have problems with the constrains of educational system. On the other hand plenty of idiots manage to get through college.

So do I. But I also know a few men who had major hangups because their girlfriends/wives had higher degrees than they did or more money than they did and they took it out on their other halves.

beks101

I think the degree thing is a background thing. I wouldn't call someone snobby for wanting a similar educational background as they have; it's a preference just like wanting someone with a similar cultural or religious background.

Some people like to date within their peer group, others like to date outside of it, attraction works differently for everyone.

Emme

clairefontaine wrote: »

So do I. But I also know a few men who had major hangups because their girlfriends/wives had higher degrees than they did or more money than they did and they took it out on their other halves.

That indicates deeper problems and if they weren't taking their educational inadequacies out on their partner it would be something else. If they were more secure in themselves having no college qualification wouldn't be a problem.

I don't think it matters if somebody has a degree or not, I have one but I have dated guys who haven't finished school, PhDs and everything in between.

Unfortunately education nowadays doesn't mean somebody is intelligent or informed, it means they're good at conforming to a system which in some cases is akin to brainwashing.

Carlos Orange

beks101 wrote: »

I think the degree thing is a background thing. I wouldn't call someone snobby for wanting a similar educational background as they have; it's a preference just like wanting someone with a similar cultural or religious background.

Some people like to date within their peer group, others like to date outside of it, attraction works differently for everyone.

I find a check list a little strange but to each their own.

Practically speaking I think 50% more females graduate from 3rd level than males.

April O Neill

beks101 wrote: »

I think the degree thing is a background thing. I wouldn't call someone snobby for wanting a similar educational background as they have; it's a preference just like wanting someone with a similar cultural or religious background.

Some people like to date within their peer group, others like to date outside of it, attraction works differently for everyone.

My boyfriend doesn't have a degree, but I still consider him part of my peer group. Any one who thinks a lack of degree indicates a lack of intelligence is misguided. And despite what many people insist, that will be the reason some of them won't consider a degree-less person as a partner. In a way, I think it's more impressive to become a success without the comfort blanket of a degree.

seenitall

April O Neill wrote: »

And despite what many people insist, that will be the reason some of them won't consider a degree-less person as a partner.

As is their right.

eviltwin

seenitall wrote: »

As is their right.

It is. But its very short sighted. If any of my single friends told me they had no interest in anyone without a degree I'd want to shake a bit of sense into them. The more selective you are the smaller your choices are.

seenitall

eviltwin wrote: »

It is. But its very short sighted. If any of my single friends told me they had no interest in anyone without a degree I'd want to shake a bit of sense into them.

I also think it is short-sighted and misguided to think anyone with a degree is any more intelligent than anyone without. I do think most people know at this stage that intelligence has nothing to do with formal education.

As I said, I married a guy who left school at 15, to work and then travel the world, and when I met him he had never had any formal education beyond 15 years of age, which to me seemed extraordinary at that point. But I quickly realised that he was/is one of the most intelligent, well-informed, well-read, clued-in people I'd ever met, a big part of which is why I fell for him. He travelled the world, he follows news daily and he regularly and avidly reads books, novels, blogs, 'The New Scientist' (I'd never even heard of 'The New Scientist' until I met him). Fair play to him, and, as April says, I also feel like it's more impressive for someone like that to have all the knowledge he does, than someone who has had opportunities for advancement handed to them all their lives (for example - but I'm not saying that everyone with a degree has had all the same opportunities either!)

But as for the more selective you are, the smaller your choices, my point is, what of it? A person's criteria are their criteria, their choices theirs to make.

For example, I wouldn't feel comfortable shaking sense into people on boards because I don't have a first clue as to how deep their hankering for someone with a formal education runs, or what's behind it, or any of the rest of their preferences.

Friends are perhaps a bit different because with people you are close to, you generally have a fairly good idea what makes them tick and what kind of issues they face so you can perhaps help them with dealing with themselves more easily. But you know what, I still wouldn't. Perhaps you'll find this wrong of me to say, but I think if a friend of mine wanted a man with a degree and nothing else would do, then fine, I'd be all for that too. I kind of tend to let people be their own navigators and make their own mistakes, even people who are close. Especially as I can never guarantee that the choices I would make for them would turn out better then the ones they would make for themselves - in fact, I always think it has to be the other way around. But like I said, that's just me. (Maybe I think too much.)

fits

I think the college education being preferable as per the OP's list is just a general desire to meet someone with the same experiences and intelligence as herself. I am sure if she met a really smart guy, all else being good it wouldn't matter if he had a degree or not. Unfair to zone in on this I think.

eviltwin

seenitall wrote: »

I also think it is short-sighted and misguided to think anyone with a degree is any more intelligent than anyone without. I do think most people know at this stage that intelligence has nothing to do with formal education.

As I said, I married a guy who left school at 15, to work and then travel the world, and when I met him he had never had any formal education beyond 15 years of age, which to me seemed extraordinary at that point. But I quickly realised that he was/is one of the most intelligent, well-informed, well-read, clued-in people I'd ever met, a big part of which is why I fell for him. He travelled the world, he follows news daily and he regularly and avidly reads books, novels, blogs, 'The New Scientist' (I'd never even heard of 'The New Scientist' until I met him). Fair play to him, and, as April says, I also feel like it's more impressive for someone like that to have all the knowledge he does, than someone who has had opportunities for advancement handed to them all their lives (for example - but I'm not saying that everyone with a degree has had all the same opportunities either!)

But as for the more selective you are, the smaller your choices, my point is, what of it? A person's criteria are their criteria, their choices theirs to make.

For example, I wouldn't feel comfortable shaking sense into people on boards because I don't have a first clue as to how deep their hankering for someone with a formal education runs, or what's behind it, or any of the rest of their preferences.

Friends are perhaps a bit different because with people you are close to, you generally have a fairly good idea what makes them tick and what kind of issues they face so you can perhaps help them with dealing with themselves more easily. But you know what, I still wouldn't. Perhaps you'll find this wrong of me to say, but I think if a friend of mine wanted a man with a degree and nothing else would do, then fine, I'd be all for that too. I kind of tend to let people be their own navigators and make their own mistakes, even people who are close. Especially as I can never guarantee that the choices I would make for them would turn out better then the ones they would make for themselves - in fact, I always think it has to be the other way around. But like I said, that's just me. (Maybe I think too much.)

I'm talking moreso about people I know in RL rather than anyone who posted here. I'm in my mid 30's now and I know people from all walks of life. I would hope my friends who also know those people would have a bit of wisdom and cop now at this stage in their lives not to judge someone as not being good enough because he's either not got a degree or something else and see beyond the window dressing to the person underneath.

Ultimately people have their own criteria and that's okay as it only affects them but its very hard to be the shoulder to cry on for a single friend who wonders why she can't meet the one when she has turned down honest, decent blokes because he didn't go to college or doesn't have his own house by the age of 35.

I would always encourage people to have an open mind. If you can't get past his lack of education or whatever fair enough but why not give it a shot and see how it goes?

valvalen

valvalen wrote: »

Female, early 30's. After being single for the best part of 4 years, and the pool of eligible men ever-diminishing (settled down/emigrated/players), am beginning to realise that I'm hankering after the unreachable dream!
I'm talking about meeting someone attractive, intelligent, good job, good relationship with friends& family, ect ect. Who's going to tick all these boxes, emotional& practical?
I don't even tick them all myself!
So folks, advice please, have you knowingly comprimised, if so on what?
Regrets, lessons learned?

I don't really get people who have 'criteria'. My only criteria is finding someone I get on well with, who makes me happy and makes me feel good about myself.

I think a lot of people are too fussy and for want of a better phrase, try to punch above their weight. I know a woman who's 34 and single and has a similar list to you, but the thing is that doesn't meet many of the criteria herself. She's quite plain, doesn't have a particularly great job, doesn't have many hobbies, isn't actually that nice, but she expects to marry a lovely, charitable, intelligent guy with loads of money who looks like Brad Pitt. Quite frankly, she's being ridiculous. She expects more than she can offer to someone else. I have to stop myself sometimes from telling her that she's deluded. I have friends who are drop-dead gorgeous and work as models, have good degrees and are lovely people and they aren't as demanding as she is!

seenitall

eviltwin wrote: »

I would always encourage people to have an open mind. If you can't get past his lack of education or whatever fair enough but why not give it a shot and see how it goes?

True. That's a nice and gentle way of 'encouraging' a friend in such a predicament. Then it's up to her.

seenitall

Alina Hot Oats wrote: »

I don't really get people who have 'criteria'. My only criteria is finding someone I get on well with, who makes me happy and makes me feel good about myself.

I think a lot of people are too fussy and for want of a better phrase, try to punch above their weight. I know a woman who's 34 and single and has a similar list to you, but the thing is that doesn't meet many of the criteria herself. She's quite plain, doesn't have a particularly great job, doesn't have many hobbies, isn't actually that nice, but she expects to marry a lovely, charitable, intelligent guy with loads of money who looks like Brad Pitt. Quite frankly, she's being ridiculous. She expects more than she can offer to someone else. I have to stop myself sometimes from telling her that she's deluded. I have friends who are drop-dead gorgeous and work as models, have good degrees and are lovely people and they aren't as demanding as she is!

Yes, deluded is the word.

I always think that something deeper has to be going on with people like that.

I have a friend who is similar, except she only ever targets men who are either emotionally or factually unavailable to her. She's 43, and she's always been like this, and never in a relationship of any kind due to it. Yet she allegedly wants a relationship.

However, I think no, for whatever reason, she doesn't really want a relationship. Otherwise there would have been one, with an available man, in the 20 or so years I've known her. That's kind of a given to me at this point.

I'd say an excessive fussiness or a deliberate, unswerving delusion regarding realistic chances could very well be in the same ballpark as my friend's case.

Catari Jaguar

To admonish a woman for looking for a person with good job or money is unfair.

Studies show that women will choose men that are successful because they want good genes for their child so that they too will be successful in life and survive. It also ensures that the man can provide for them. This is all instinctive, so no point in arguing it with a modern or feminist perspective.

It doesnt make you a money grabber or shallow, it just shows you are looking for traits that generally equal success in this culture, such as ambition, intelligence, working hard, motivation, being savvy.

Women get accused of being picky, but they have a massive criteria for a suitable mate reproduction. Men on the other hand at base level will go for youth and fertility so on the same level get accused of being shallow. Ah well.

eviltwin

Catari Jaguar wrote: »

Studies show that women will choose men that are successful because they want good genes for their child so that they too will be successful in life and survive. It also ensures that the man can provide for them. This is all instinctive

I must have missed the memo on that. Or else my genes must be defective.

I certainly didn't end up with a man who is successful and who can provide for me but I'm no worse off for it