Deal Breakers in relationships

LameWolf

onlyroz wrote: »

For those who say they wouldn't have a problem being in a relationship with somebody of a different faith, how far does this go? For example what if your partner insisted on raising your child in their faith? Or on sending them to a faith school?

For me, I would be OK being with somebody who identified vaguely as Christian, for example, but it would be a total deal-breaker if they insisted on baptising our children or on sending them to a faith school, or on taking them to church each Sunday.

I would have no problem at all with someone being of a different religion from me as long as they didn't object to my practising Pagan rituals as I see fit, and setting up my altar somewhere in the house.
The children aspect isn't applicable - as I mentioned earlier, children are so far off my radar I've never even considered the idea that I could ever be with someone who wanted them.:o

SailorSam

LilElvis wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with "being religious", but it can be a major source of contention if a couple hold diametrically opposing beliefs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTouKoOV80g

BarryBlue

Jagraf wrote: »

I don't recognise what you are saying in any of my experiences. I have known one or two religious people who tread the moral high ground but no more than atheists who try to persuade otherwise. I don't see many relationships breaking down because of religion either, its usually affairs, money or falling out of love. I don't know of any friends I have who try to tell me how to live my life either. Most people aren't interested in others beliefs. How do you know all these religious people and their relationships? Are your close friends religious?

My experience is that atheists have better things to do than worry about trying to show religious folk the reality of things. I look at it this way: you can't reason someone out of a position which they didn't reason themselves into.

I have known a few people who have either taken up with religious women or been married to women who suddenly discover religion, usually following some life trauma, and their relationships have all eventually failed. (I do know people whose relationships have failed for other reasons too!) I tend not to have religious friends as they seem to be different types from me. I always find them rather staid and straight-laced so just gravitate in a different direction.

There were two factors that drove me away from religion as a child. My school, although a non-church grammar, was very pro-religion and we were 'expected' to believe and participate. I had realised by about age 12 that it was clearly just fictional and so had many run-ins with the teaching staff for daring to question it all. The other was a bible-bashing grandmother who we all dreaded visiting because she was such a complete misery.

Peter333

Hmmmmm, some things are beginning to get a LITTLE bit clearer..........

mark5

Male

Tattoos
Short hair
Bunny boilers

heuchera

BarryBlue wrote: »

My experience is that atheists have better things to do than worry about trying to show religious folk the reality of things. I look at it this way: you can't reason someone out of a position which they didn't reason themselves into.

The problem with trying to reason with an atheist (as opposed to a religious person) is that a religious person believes certain things, whereas an atheist knows it all.

Much more difficult to deal with someone who "knows" their version of events to be true than a non-judgemental religious person (which most are) who respects people of all faiths and none.

Farel01

I have always seen atheism as anti religion (it is in the word ) and with the atheists I know that is definitely true. Both my OH and his family pretty much hate religion and attribute much of the world's misery to it. They also think religious folk are thick on the whole.

I have always classed myself as agnostic, I don't believe, but I can't be sure 80% of the world is wrong either. I have always been quite jealous of people with faith, having that moral framework and that surety of an afterlife must give a lot of peace.

Even though in my relationship we are both non believers, because we non believe in a different way it has been the cause for some pretty spectacular arguments. So I can imagine why being a mixed religious couple would be a struggle.

NBLondon

I'm fascinated that so many people (female) need to specify that their prospective/theoretical other half should not be an unwashed racist violent drunk. Are there that many out there who wouldn't consider those as deal-breakers? Actually, yes - they can usually be seen crying to Jeremy Kyle about it...


I'm male and I'd say...


Controlling or unwilling to trust me. (I do realise that for many people this comes from previous bad experiences but if you can't move on from that; you're not ready for a new relationship).


Unable/unwilling to be independent. Including those who cannot do a thing or think for themselves if they can get you to do it and those who want/need to be with their family every other day. You are not expected to leave them completely but you are also supposed to be part of a new one.


Prepared to give and take in all things. A relationship should be roughly equal. It may vary over time and doesn't have to be absolutely 50:50 in all respects but it should even out in the long term.


Unlike many men I don't have specific limitations on physical attractiveness. I have preferences but the sort of bloke who tells himself "I only go for slim blondes" or whatever is an idiot.


I'd say "deal-breaker" means the sort of thing you won't compromise on even if everything else was great - so the only true one for me is children - I didn't, don't and won't want any. Thankfully, I married someone of the same opinion.

burlington6

NBLondon wrote: »

I'm fascinated that so many people (female) need to specify that their prospective/theoretical other half should not be an unwashed racist violent drunk. Are there that many out there who wouldn't consider those as deal-breakers? Actually, yes - they can usually be seen crying to Jeremy Kyle about it...


I'm male and I'd say...


Controlling or unwilling to trust me. (I do realise that for many people this comes from previous bad experiences but if you can't move on from that; you're not ready for a new relationship).


Unable/unwilling to be independent. Including those who cannot do a thing or think for themselves if they can get you to do it and those who want/need to be with their family every other day. You are not expected to leave them completely but you are also supposed to be part of a new one.


Prepared to give and take in all things. A relationship should be roughly equal. It may vary over time and doesn't have to be absolutely 50:50 in all respects but it should even out in the long term.


Unlike many men I don't have specific limitations on physical attractiveness. I have preferences but the sort of bloke who tells himself "I only go for slim blondes" or whatever is an idiot.


I'd say "deal-breaker" means the sort of thing you won't compromise on even if everything else was great - so the only true one for me is children - I didn't, don't and won't want any. Thankfully, I married someone of the same opinion.

Why? If that's what he like then good for him.

If a woman can say she will only date men taller than her she can't be a hypocrite when a man tells her she isn't for him because she's too fat.

Peter333

burlington6 wrote: »

Why? If that's what he like then good for him.

If a woman can say she will only date men taller than her she can't be a hypocrite when a man tells her she isn't for him because she's too fat.

I have to agree. That was an unfair thing for NBLondon to say. I mean how would he feel if someone said that someone who doesn't want children (like he doesn't) is an idiot?

Why should a man NOT have a physical preference for women? As someone who looks after myself, and keeps fit, and plays sports, and eats healthily, I would not ever be attracted to a woman who is very obese.

Curvy is good, and so is slim, and even slightly overweight (like say Coleen Nolan who is around 3 stone overweight, but is a pretty and attractive girl.) But there is no way I would be attracted to a woman who was very obese. (Like 7-8 stone or more overweight, and a BMI of 45+.)

As B said above, it seems to be OK for a woman to say she wants a man taller, and he must have a job, and a full head of hair etc etc, but God forbid a man says he doesn't want a very overweight woman.

IMO, the vast majority of men are not attracted to very large women. Most men will prefer a woman who is slim, curvy, athletic or thin.

Luckily my wife is very attractive to me.

What would I do if she got very big? (Like a size 24 or more/7-8 stone plus heavier...) I would still love her and care about her, but I probably wouldn't be physically attracted to her. And she would not be physically attracted to me if *I* gained 7 stone or more. Moreover, I wouldn't expect her to be attracted to me, if I let myself go to that extent.