How do people settle?

[Kate9292]

Based on her many posts, she has a laundry list of wants.

 

"Chemistry" does not exist. It's simply based on physical aspects of the guy (how good looking he is) and how well their personalities interact.

 

You just contradicted yourself.

 

How can it not exist if it's based on something?

 

And have you thought that this "laundry list" may just be an observation of what probably causes chemistry? For example I never had any chemistry towards short guy. So I add "being tall" to my "laundry list". Is it entitlement? Or maybe just an observation that it never worked for me and I can't imagine it working?

 

If there was a short guy that lit my fire and didn't have any huge deal breakers, I'd be all over him. But it never happened and can't see it happening anytime soon.

 

Not like there is lack of supply of not short guys for me to worry about that though

[Eclypse]

It's quite easy to get into a comfortable rut. It happened to me so gradually I didn't even notice until I was neck deep. My girlfriend displayed numerous personality traits that were very different to mine, and there were things I didn't like. Initially I overlooked them. I thought she would change, but now I've learned few people change. I was just overjoyed that a girl finally paid attention to me. Now we're just kind of cruising along. She basically said, this is who I am, take it or leave it. That's fair enough. I'm still undecided on what to do, as we are genuinely in love.

[Eternal Sunshine]

I just need to make a decision and stick to it.

 

If I am going to try "settling" as in dating a guy that I know is good for me but I don't "fancy" then I need to give it some time and see what develops.

 

If I am going to wait for someone I am crazy about, then I need to stop thinking of dating guys I don't "fancy".

 

Basically I need to stop waffling and second guessing myself.

[Woggle]

I just need to make a decision and stick to it.

 

If I am going to try "settling" as in dating a guy that I know is good for me but I don't "fancy" then I need to give it some time and see what develops.

 

If I am going to wait for someone I am crazy about, then I need to stop thinking of dating guys I don't "fancy".

 

Basically I need to stop waffling and second guessing myself.

 

How about taking some time from dating and figuring out why you are attracted to unavailable men. Get to the root of the issue.

[runningfar]

It's hard to say exactly. I will say there are people like me who physical attraction and spark doesn't mean much to, period, and the attraction is in knowing the person... so a "meh" first reaction could easily lead to very much happiness and such. You might not have overwhelming spark but you might be very compatible and it grows. It's like a a tiny ember that grows verse a blaze that can quickly disappear. If you feel , "I am settling" I don't see that going into happiness, but if you're simply being logical and open, that certainly can... People focus too much on some idealized version of love and people... The point in relationships is hardly to make yourself happy and snag some buck that will impress your friends for your wall, it's finding a partner you can rely upon and trying to make them happy - and one that will try the same, and you both, in giving, are happy in return.

 

I don't feel like I've settled, but there is a reason I only date someone I am friends with first. I'm not looking for passion, and it doesn't impress me - and frankly, is not something I am prone to upon meeting someone before a mental connection... and I have been in a position to get a few "why" questions from my friends who don't feel that way or jokes from his friends about him reaching high with my ex husband when we got together. (And we didn't break up because I wasn't happy. We had a stressful period that he dealt with poorly when doing the testing and it came out I could not have children.)

[xxoo]

Why do you want to be partnered so badly that you are considering forcing it with someone you aren't attracted to?

[runningfar]

I just need to make a decision and stick to it.

 

If I am going to try "settling" as in dating a guy that I know is good for me but I don't "fancy" then I need to give it some time and see what develops.

 

If I am going to wait for someone I am crazy about, then I need to stop thinking of dating guys I don't "fancy".

 

Basically I need to stop waffling and second guessing myself.

 

Don't date someone you don't really like. Try being friends first.

 

Otherwise, it'll be hurt for you-- if they leave and you feel like you were I don't know, doing them a favor, it will feel insulting. If you don't develop feelings, you wasted their time which is really a very mean thing to do ot anyone.

 

As long as your mind is working in thse terms though, you're not going to be happy with anything less than what you've pictured. You basically hav to get to a point where the picture is gone and you're just enjoying the interaction and finding a person that you can be with and enjoy your time with, and have compatible values.

[todreaminblue]

every guy has soem good points that you can concentrate on and not the meh ones...eventually it isnt a case of settling but a case of seeing deeper than where you were looking before....i hope......ill let you know...and maybe it isnt me settling but him....because i am no picnic...smilin......i am several picnics held in a hail storm..so if a guy can settle with me......he is brave......deb

[Shepp]

Out of interest - Where do you draw the line between settling and compromising?

 

No one is perfect, you wouldn't be human so in every relationship you make compromises but you wouldn't always say you were settling.

 

Like I love my gf to pieces but she can be moody & impulsive and I'm sure she'd say I'm stubborn and impatient but in no way would we be settling for each other.

[Eternal Sunshine]

Out of interest - Where do you draw the line between settling and compromising?

 

No one is perfect, you wouldn't be human so in every relationship you make compromises but you wouldn't always say you were settling.

 

Like I love my gf to pieces but she can be moody & impulsive and I'm sure she'd say I'm stubborn and impatient but in no way would we be settling for each other.

 

You are not, you are in love. Those details are irrelevant. You would be suprised how hard it is for me to find anyone that even has basic criteria in place.

 

It works like this: a guy needs to be kind hearted, ethical, honest and reliable. If he is not one of those then I don't go further; his looks are irrelevant

 

Next step is intelligence. He must be above average there as I perceive it. I can't compromise at all.

 

If those 2 are in place; I consider looks and physical attraction. That's where I'm preperad to lower the bar the most. Ideally I would want that spark but it's been years since I met a man that satisfied all 3 criteria. Realistically it's not going to happen for me.

 

So I'm trying to figure out how much I can lower that bar and still be reasonably happy.

[Leigh 87]

You are not, you are in love. Those details are irrelevant. You would be suprised how hard it is for me to find anyone that even has basic criteria in place.

 

It works like this: a guy needs to be kind hearted, ethical, honest and reliable. If he is not one of those then I don't go further; his looks are irrelevant

 

Next step is intelligence. He must be above average there as I perceive it. I can't compromise at all.

 

If those 2 are in place; I consider looks and physical attraction. That's where I'm preperad to lower the bar the most. Ideally I would want that spark but it's been years since I met a man that satisfied all 3 criteria. Realistically it's not going to happen for me.

 

So I'm trying to figure out how much I can lower that bar and still be reasonably happy.

 

 

 

Dear, it is just your criteria that makes it harder than usual.

 

To get the spark and chemistry in the first place with a nice enough guy is hard and takes time.

To have the man also be of intelligence AND be cute? As well as having the passion and spark? Harder to find.

 

 

 

 

I definately think it will happen for you, it will just take a lot longer than girls like me who have less strict criteria.

 

You are a stunning girl who is different and stands out, both your looks and personality.

Just wait a little longer, and potentially see a therapist to help uncover any underying reasos WHY you are not feeling the spark for nice guys.

 

You're mum and you have a difficult relationship, yes? From what I have read of your threads? Perhaps you have some personal issues that are making you not feel like you are not good enough to achieve love and happiness?

 

...As long as you dont need a really hot guy, then I don't see why you won't get an intelligent man of good character AND who you spark with?

 

 

Please don't feel down about it. I am convinved even a girl like me will find an adoring man who I also spark with.

[heartshaped]

I had a list, when I was younger, of traits I wanted my partner to have. I went around eliminating men based upon that list until I found someone that met all my criteria. He and I spent several years together, but I never could manage to fall in love with him. The lesson I learned from that relationship was invaluable.

 

He made me realize that loving someone isn't something you can force and often the person that you are going to be crazy about isn't the person that's going to meet every criteria on some list you have in your head. I was much more open after him to who I dated and why.

 

Also, I think some people build relationships and love up too much in their head. Out of all the dating I've done, there was only one man that I was truly crazy about even as the years passed. There were some I was crazy about in the beginning, but it faded with time. Being crazy about someone was never one of my criteria, I understand that's rare and even if you are crazy about someone in the beginning it may not last. Love and/or being in love doesn't always equal being crazy about the person.

[iris219]

ES, I know how tempting it is to want to settle, and how frustrating it is when there aren't even men available to settle with.

 

It will be a disaster if you settle for someone you are not all that attracted to. You will dread sex. You will cringe when he tries to touch you.

 

Physical attraction is necessary for those times when there's conflict in the relationship. Without it, you're left during these times with a man you can't stand. I prefer a man I can't stand, but still want to f*ck.

 

Imagine how awful it would be to be annoyed with someone and not attracted to them. Attraction gets you through the rough patches in a relationship.

[GoodOnPaper]

I don't see settling as working out for any woman unless for some reason she is being intentionally manipulative with an ulterior motive. There are just too many options out there for women. No sense in settling when there are always more guys out there.

[FitChick]

I had a list, when I was younger, of traits I wanted my partner to have. I went around eliminating men based upon that list until I found someone that met all my criteria. He and I spent several years together, but I never could manage to fall in love with him. The lesson I learned from that relationship was invaluable.

 

He made me realize that loving someone isn't something you can force and often the person that you are going to be crazy about isn't the person that's going to meet every criteria on some list you have in your head.

 

I had such a list and it worked well for me. Helped me to focus. I also had a companion list of what I would not tolerate in a man and faults I could put up with. Only listing ideal traits is fantasy.

 

What I didn't realize at the time was that, while a man might tick every box on MY list, I might not tick every box on HIS list. The two lists have to synch up. That is the problem for everyone. You very well could meet your ideal man but you may not be his ideal woman, so the search continues.

[SJC2008]

ES you talk about settling but not one have I seen you mention marriage or children, unless I missed it. Are you looking for a steady BF or do you want M&C??

 

While I do think settling exists I do beleive there is a difference between must haves and nice to haves. If I still wanted to get married, a small part of me still does,I would go this route. Since I probably won't get married, as long as she's decent looking, has a cool personality and isn't a bitch on wheels I'm games.

[xxoo]

You are not, you are in love. Those details are irrelevant. You would be suprised how hard it is for me to find anyone that even has basic criteria in place.

 

It works like this: a guy needs to be kind hearted, ethical, honest and reliable. If he is not one of those then I don't go further; his looks are irrelevant

 

Next step is intelligence. He must be above average there as I perceive it. I can't compromise at all.

 

If those 2 are in place; I consider looks and physical attraction. That's where I'm preperad to lower the bar the most. Ideally I would want that spark but it's been years since I met a man that satisfied all 3 criteria. Realistically it's not going to happen for me.

 

So I'm trying to figure out how much I can lower that bar and still be reasonably happy.

 

It's been years since you met a man who was kind hearted, ethical, honest, reliable, intelligent, and attractive?

 

I find that difficult to believe. Maybe your attractive bar is higher than you think, or (more likely) there is something X factor that triggers attraction for you that is incompatible with the first 2 criteria.

[CptSaveAho]

It's been years since you met a man who was kind hearted, ethical, honest, reliable, intelligent, and attractive?

 

yup... this is what happens when you date/bang losers/bad boys for YEARS and expect prince charming to magically be waiting for you when you decide its time to settle down.

 

should have thought about this 10+ years ago imo instead of now when the music stopped playing and the looks are fading

[SincereOnlineGuy]

People here say that to me all the time, which is kind of baffling.

 

 

I don't quite believe it. Not in the sense that I think you're telling me crap, not at all. Moreso in the sense that you THINK you might ask me out, but if you did know me in real life, there'd likely be something that would stop you. Because if all the men on this site who claimed they'd ask me out if they saw me in the street, truly WOULD, you'd think that the men who really do see me day to day might ask me out. But they don't.

 

 

There's something that's preventing me from attracting men.

 

 

And so I "settle", so to speak...

 

 

Phoe, what else could it BE other than mere intimidation, entirely self-perceived by the minds of the men who are nearby to you?

 

And if you're 5' 8", AND have only dated one guy taller than you, that does speak as to your open-mindedness where it concerns seeking a mate. (while simultaneously hinting partly at why friends view you as "settling")

 

I think some just have that important, mostly self-contained, ability to keep themselves thriving by knowing more attainable pursuits and continuing to gain for having notched successes... in contrast to those who always set the bar really high and sometimes find themselves having to over-leap their abilities and then falling down hard.

 

(think of a neighborhood Pee-Wee baseball team that goes 7-12 just about every year, and never comes close to winning the league championship: Well some new coaches might shoot for the moon, and never get it, while others set more modest goals of reaching 10-9 in a couple of years, and thriving amid the camaraderie known to the little kids)

 

In either case, (love or Pee Wee baseball), the accumulation of trophies is NOT the first/main concern, but each individual involved has the option of revamping his/her own psychology to really gain something from each of the little things/accomplishments and eventually, it is from the collection of those past gains that the internal rewards are derived. (***amusingly, many of the very worst romantic relationships are when the guy attains the mere "trophy" - Courtney Stodden, take a bow)

 

Were this not the case, then nearly all married 50yo's would be willing and wanting to 'upgrade' to a younger, fresher, and hotter partner if, that is, you were to subtract the effects of the shared emotional/psychological gains accumulated over a long time together.

[Stellar Wench]

I am curious how do people date someone they are meh about and end up sticking with it? Some of them even seem genuinely happy.

 

My life would be so much easier if I could do that. I am looking for some pointers, especially from women.

Why date someone you are meh about? That's your issue not theirs. If you're having trouble with men, don't blame the men. Look at the type of men you are choosing because you are always the common denominator.

[SincereOnlineGuy]

 

LOOKS. ARE. SUBJECTIVE.

 

 

 

Looks are subjective to a certain extent, but your own sense of your own looks is so far off, that it basically becomes 'unfair' to the scenario of this discussion.

 

First of all, the traditional "Frat Boy" scale of "1 through 10"... has 5.5 as "average", and somehow you're on record as pegging yourself below that - which is just absurd.

 

If you were standing mere feet from sober frat boys, who were each polled separately and discreetly, you would land somewhere in the 7.5 to 8 range. That's a lot of things, but "average" isn't one of them.

 

If you would 'recalibrate' your sense of yourself to reflect that reality, then the discussions wouldn't likely become so heated.

 

And consider (like anybody else would) that any such assessment of your level of attractiveness, would include ALL of you, from head to toe, and not just factors they talk about in Cosmo' when a model's face is shot close-up enough so you can map her pores.

 

If a totally plain girl like me... any plain girl like me

 

 

"average" girl like me... And no I am not deluded,

 

I am slim with curves and have perfect teeth myelf.

 

a normal girl like me... I am a positive person and, although 5/10 in looks, I still have strong points that SOME guys really find attractive; such as my nice teeth, nice figure

 

"normal" in the sense where women (probably get pressured SO much by the society all around them, that they aren't realistic and fair to themselves).

 

average girls like me... I am not delusional either

 

Guys I have been with all loved my slim figure and large boobs, and TO THEM I was as good as any porn star in bed they could "imagine"

 

(gotta add: )

 

{but} Your views are skewed...

 

 

I do have strong points; I am slim with large boobs and a butt and a killer figure. Straight teeth. Clear skin. Average girls like me

 

She was an average girl like me.

 

I am not deluded. I have actually found men who find me to be very attractive.

 

No kidding?? - because you are very attractive

 

(but that element is impacting the context of your deliveries here)

[xxoo]

When you consider the men you feel strong attraction to (want to have sex with), do they tend to lack kindness, ethics, reliability, honesty, and/or intelligence?

[Never Again]

Everyone has to settle.

 

Everyone. You can call it "compromise", and it is a more comfortable form...but it's still agreed to accept less than you expected.

 

It's a simple matter of what you want versus what you get. Having realistic expectations and being able and willing to compromise and work towards getting *more* of what you want helps.

 

As far as relationships go, it's important to separate your wants from your needs.

 

NEVER settle on your needs. However, if you're not willing to settle on your wants...then you're going to end up chasing a fantasy.

 

My most recent ex had some traits that grated on me, and wasn't 100% what I "wanted". But I loved her completely and absolutely. I loved her for her flaws because they made me appreciate her positive values so much more.

 

I settled in this regard, and I couldn't have been happier to do so.

 

 

 

Since this thread ended up getting derailed a bit by the spark/chemistry/passion/lust conversation, I will contribute the following:

 

A "spark" is nice. Sometimes it's just there, and sometimes it develops. However, that's infatuation. It's attraction. Those things do not last. Those "lovey-dovey" moments, those butterflies in the tummy, that excitement...fades. It's actually a wonderful thing for it to fade too - it allows the rose colored glasses to come off completely so that you can evaluate the relationship without "those feelings" getting in the way. That is how you ensure that you're not settling.

 

Despite the adament objection on this thread, it is well known that "people want what they can't have". If someone wants you too much, it's unattractive. Kills the "chemistry". The less available someone is, the more likely you are to feel those "sparks". There's a reason why dating advice for both genders tells people not be too available.

 

Unfortunately, stability/availabity and passion are mutually exclusive. This is why so many people are attractive to elusive, emotionally unavailable, noncommittal people. This is why people who really want to work at a relationship are usually left behind.

 

This is actually why many people end up really settling. They accept not having their really needs met because they WANT that passion. They want their heart to flutter every time they see someone, and are willing to compromise the important things.

 

Meanwhile, people can have the important things met, find someone attractive...yet still walk away because they don't feel "in love" all the time. When I hear people refering to "settling", they're most often talking about those romantic feelings...they want someone who inspires those feelings 100% of the time with no work.

 

The initial "spark" will lead to the passionate fire of the honeymoon period, but this typically fades within the first 6 months to 2 years (most often around the yearish mark). The fire is HOT - this is "falling in love". It's exciting, blinding and so so so fun. This fades into the embers of a long term relationship...if you let it get that far.

 

The embers aren't HOT, but they're warm. They're consistant. They're the embers of compassion, sincerity, trust, and appreciation. "In love" fades to just "love" after awhile. However, these embers can flare up and bring that HOT fire back again with a little bit of kindling. A little air, a good poke, and some fuel...and it all comes back.

 

But who wants to WORK for that? I've actually been told that I'm foolish for thinking I should work to maintain my feelings. I've been told that I'm unromantic and stupid. That feelings come naturally and I should always feel "in love". I should always be lusting after my partner. I should always be excited to see them and giddy.

 

That's exhausting. That's also an immature view on love. That kind of love is based on anxiety - on the mystery of not knowing your partner intimately or knowing 100% if they'll stick around. It's based on the unstable pillar of passion.

 

Constantly feeling "in love" is an immature desire because it's selfish. It has no regard for the other person, and is rather entirely focused on how that person makes YOU feel. Truly successful couples fall in love countless times throughout their relationship...but you can't "fall in love" again unless you let that state subside for awhile.

[Sanman]

I was going to say something similar to pfenixphire, but no need to do so anymore. You know what, it is working for me and I appreciate it more than any amount of passion I may have given up in another relationship. I truly enjoy the fact that we are a team and working together to build a family. Do I miss all the crazy sex? Sure. Do I miss the calls asking for rent money and fights that go with being partnered to a person that enjoys crazy sex? No.

 

Everyone settles in some way. The question is simply finding the combination of traits that works best for you. I did this by simply dating everyone who would go out with me at least once and seeing if I saw a future there. Personally, I find loyalty and duty severely underrated traits in modern relationships. Then again, I grew up in a culture of arranged marriages, so maybe my perspective is a little different.

[ThaWholigan]

Everyone has to settle.

 

Everyone. You can call it "compromise", and it is a more comfortable form...but it's still agreed to accept less than you expected.

 

It's a simple matter of what you want versus what you get. Having realistic expectations and being able and willing to compromise and work towards getting *more* of what you want helps.

 

As far as relationships go, it's important to separate your wants from your needs.

 

NEVER settle on your needs. However, if you're not willing to settle on your wants...then you're going to end up chasing a fantasy.

 

My most recent ex had some traits that grated on me, and wasn't 100% what I "wanted". But I loved her completely and absolutely. I loved her for her flaws because they made me appreciate her positive values so much more.

 

I settled in this regard, and I couldn't have been happier to do so.

 

 

 

Since this thread ended up getting derailed a bit by the spark/chemistry/passion/lust conversation, I will contribute the following:

 

A "spark" is nice. Sometimes it's just there, and sometimes it develops. However, that's infatuation. It's attraction. Those things do not last. Those "lovey-dovey" moments, those butterflies in the tummy, that excitement...fades. It's actually a wonderful thing for it to fade too - it allows the rose colored glasses to come off completely so that you can evaluate the relationship without "those feelings" getting in the way. That is how you ensure that you're not settling.

 

Despite the adament objection on this thread, it is well known that "people want what they can't have". If someone wants you too much, it's unattractive. Kills the "chemistry". The less available someone is, the more likely you are to feel those "sparks". There's a reason why dating advice for both genders tells people not be too available.

 

Unfortunately, stability/availabity and passion are mutually exclusive. This is why so many people are attractive to elusive, emotionally unavailable, noncommittal people. This is why people who really want to work at a relationship are usually left behind.

 

This is actually why many people end up really settling. They accept not having their really needs met because they WANT that passion. They want their heart to flutter every time they see someone, and are willing to compromise the important things.

 

Meanwhile, people can have the important things met, find someone attractive...yet still walk away because they don't feel "in love" all the time. When I hear people refering to "settling", they're most often talking about those romantic feelings...they want someone who inspires those feelings 100% of the time with no work.

 

The initial "spark" will lead to the passionate fire of the honeymoon period, but this typically fades within the first 6 months to 2 years (most often around the yearish mark). The fire is HOT - this is "falling in love". It's exciting, blinding and so so so fun. This fades into the embers of a long term relationship...if you let it get that far.

 

The embers aren't HOT, but they're warm. They're consistant. They're the embers of compassion, sincerity, trust, and appreciation. "In love" fades to just "love" after awhile. However, these embers can flare up and bring that HOT fire back again with a little bit of kindling. A little air, a good poke, and some fuel...and it all comes back.

 

But who wants to WORK for that? I've actually been told that I'm foolish for thinking I should work to maintain my feelings. I've been told that I'm unromantic and stupid. That feelings come naturally and I should always feel "in love". I should always be lusting after my partner. I should always be excited to see them and giddy.

 

That's exhausting. That's also an immature view on love. That kind of love is based on anxiety - on the mystery of not knowing your partner intimately or knowing 100% if they'll stick around. It's based on the unstable pillar of passion.

 

Constantly feeling "in love" is an immature desire because it's selfish. It has no regard for the other person, and is rather entirely focused on how that person makes YOU feel. Truly successful couples fall in love countless times throughout their relationship...but you can't "fall in love" again unless you let that state subside for awhile.

This is the best post I've seen on this forum in months.