Are my standards too high?

[PowerPoint144]

I have a list of standards in my head and I wanted to know whether they're unrealistic:

• Marriage with someone who's not a cheater
• Pretty
• Go places as mates and be physically comfortable 
• Lets me have me time and say what I think
• Doesn't judge (or act confused about) my house, clothes, music, cooking, art, or books
• Needy when he's sick and comes up with nicknames for me

I am very young, so I have never dated before, and I don't really care about things like height, money, jobs, education, six packs, or cars. I have met pretty people before and I've went out with my friends and held hands with my friends a few times and they're very non-judgmental about my lifestyle (e.g., my house, clothes, and music) and checked up on me when I was sick.

However, I have never been intimate enough with someone that I could talk about favourite music or books and truly say what I felt, take care of them, show them my art, or get pet names from them. I think that's normal for me right now. Is it unrealistic to hope that I'll get that someday?

[Wiseman2]

1 hour ago, PowerPoint144 said:

've went out with my friends and held hands with my friends a few times and they're very non-judgmental about my lifestyle (e.g., my house, clothes, and music) and checked up on me when I was sick.

The most important thing is to meet in person and see if  there is mutual attraction. Without that all the other things are secondary.

Have a concrete list of deal breakers and red flags. Not the obvious like "doesn't cheat", but more specific to you. If someone get as far as dating you they already like your taste in things enough.

'Likes your books' or 'checking on you when sick' is something mommies do. Nicknames are also silly if you are looking for compatibility. Don't rely on that.

 A relationship is not a parent or a clone of you. It can be someone you respect and have affection for that is mutual. However as an adult you need to have varied interests and maintain your own identities, tastes, friends and interests, as well as some shared ones.

 What do you mean by "held hands with friends who checked up on me when sick? Are you looking for a man or woman or a same-sex situation?

[PowerPoint144]

4 minutes ago, Wiseman2 said:

'Checking on you when sick' is something mommies do. ... What do you mean by "held hands with friends who checked up on me when sick?" Are you looking for a man or woman or a same-sex situation?

... Having friends who ask if you're OK doesn't make you gay or mean that you have mummy issues... I don't know who you've been making friends with, but it's quite normal for friends to ask after each other, especially when one of them is sick. I'm bisexual. I don't know why that's relevant. I'm not secretly attracted to my friends because we held hands once or twice.

8 minutes ago, Wiseman2 said:

However as an adult you need to have varied interests and maintain your own identities, tastes, friends and interests, as well as some shared ones. ... 'Likes your books' is something mommies do.

What I said was that I wanted someone to honestly talk about my interests with without them acting judgemental or clueless. I never said that I wanted someone who shares all of my identities, interests, and friends and likes everything that I like... I don't see why liking to read similar things has to mean that someone is my mum either.

10 minutes ago, Wiseman2 said:

Nicknames are also silly if you are looking for compatibility. Don't rely on that.

I like giving people nicknames and writing love letters. It's verbal affection. What other criteria would you have me use if I'm not allowed to nurse someone, share nicknames with them, like the things that they like, or use obvious criteria like "not a cheater?" Really.

[glows]

The bullets aren't unrealistic but you can and should ask/expect more. You mentioned you're very young so take your time figuring things out. I had my first boyfriend when I was 18, late by some standards! Being comfortable with your partner is only just the beginning. I hope you find that one day.

[Wiseman2]

38 minutes ago, PowerPoint144 said:

 I'm bisexual. I don't know why that's relevant.

Yes it's relevant because it determines who you're attracted to and what you're looking for. Why not choose someone where there's mutual attraction, chemistry respect and compatibility. How did this list come about? Was there a disappointing relationship where someone did not respect your interests or tastes?

[PowerPoint144]

1 minute ago, Wiseman2 said:

Was there a disappointing relationship where someone did not respect your interests or tastes?

Hm... "Marriage with someone who's not a cheater" probably became important because a lot of youth date multiple people, cheat, enter long-term relationships without intention of marriage or commitment, and are openly sexually disgusting immediately. "Pretty" became important for the same reason. I am tired of being hit on by old men who could be my father like it is normal or OK. "Doesn't judge my house, clothes, music, cooking, art, or books" means that I don't want to be with a guy who wants to come into my life and tell me how to dress, where to live, how to cook, what not to listen to, how to paint, or what to like reading (or act like what I like makes no sense or is stupid because it's different).

The other stuff is just a reflection of my general disappointment with dating. I don't want to be with a guy who won't even go out with me like friends do, just sitting inside all day, or who makes me feel physically gross or unwanted: being way sexual, making me feel "too much" for wanting a hug, or making it awkward to hold hands. Furthermore, I have met a lot of teachers and peers who just couldn't accept that I was a person with my own hobbies and opinions, not a doll for them to play with. I mentioned nicknames because I like being sappy. Does any of this help?

[OatsAndHall]

I don't see any of those as being unreasonable expectations as most simply boil down to compatibility and attraction. I would amend your first bullet to "serious relationship" versus "marriage".  Just with the understanding that you need the experience of a serious relationship under your belt before you start thinking about saying vows.

I do suggest that you be flexible as you move forward and date. Down the road, you may find that some of your expectations aren't that important and I imagine you will add others to the list. It takes time and experience to figure out what you truly do and don't want out of a relationship.

Dating post divorce, I was positive that I wanted a wife and kids but that changed as I dated and grew older. My views on having children changed as did my thoughts on remarrying. There were a variety of experiences that changed my tune and I don't regret changing it.

[Foxhall]

that all seems fair enough- someone who you feel will accept you and are comfortable to express yourself with,

Its not always plain sailing- i.e no doubt you will encounter plenty of people who will be judgmental and that you wont feel comfortable with,

Personally I am quite open minded but not everyone is,

the main thing is dont let it knock your confidence when people disagree with you or take a different outlook to you, take that on board but be proud of your own wants and desires always,

I like actually you have these ideals , you have a sense of identity and what you want,

knowing what you like and what you dont like is a good headspace to be in,

not everyone has that.

 

 

[dramafreezone]

 

3 hours ago, PowerPoint144 said:

• Marriage with someone who's not a cheater
•  

I don't think there's such a thing in an absolute sense.  I think most people have the capacity to cheat given a set of circumstances favorable for them to do so.  I think of it rather as who is more likely or less likely, and I think that takes experience (both in relationships and observing other relationships) to identify signs that someone is more or less likely to cheat.

Edited November 3, 2021 by dramafreezone

[PowerPoint144]

1 minute ago, dramafreezone said:

I don't think there's such a thing in an absolute sense.  I think most people have the capacity to cheat given a set of circumstances favorable for them to do so.  I think of it rather as who is more likely or less likely, and I think that takes experience (both in relationships and observing other relationships) to identify signs that someone is more or less likely to cheat.

Do you have any examples?

[spiderowl]

I don't think you are being unrealistic about what you would like.  Finding the whole package, however, is a bit different.  You might meet someone who ticks most of those boxes but just isn't keen on some of your music.  Does that mean they are out?  No-one is going to be a perfect match.

There are some things I would look for in general:

- Respectful

- Kind

- Caring

- Honesty

- Integrity

- Stable - a job and an income insofar as it is possible in that community

- A willingness to help with tasks or to do them

- A desire to build a committed relationship and take it forward to whatever you both want

- A flexible mindset, no extremism in terms of religion, politics, food, health behaviours, fitness, attitudes to other living creatures.

The above are lasting and help to build trust and create stability.

[PowerPoint144]

2 minutes ago, spiderowl said:

You might meet someone who ticks most of those boxes but just isn't keen on some of your music.  Does that mean they are out?  No-one is going to be a perfect match.

Yes, I'm noticing that. For example, I will like a guy and he will be pretty, sweet, and laid-back but a cheater. Or a guy will tick all of the boxes but isn't very romantic. Or a guy is really physically comfortable holding hands and cuddling and squeezing and walking, but I can never discuss my feelings. Then, I worry that few men meet most of the criteria and I'm picky, expecting it all, even though it's less than what most women want...

Your list is nice—if vague—and I'll keep it in mind, especially the thing about extremism. I don't know how I'd put it into practice, but it's something to consider.

[spiderowl]

20 minutes ago, PowerPoint144 said:

Yes, I'm noticing that. For example, I will like a guy and he will be pretty, sweet, and laid-back but a cheater. Or a guy will tick all of the boxes but isn't very romantic. Or a guy is really physically comfortable holding hands and cuddling and squeezing and walking, but I can never discuss my feelings. Then, I worry that few men meet most of the criteria and I'm picky, expecting it all, even though it's less than what most women want...

Your list is nice—if vague—and I'll keep it in mind, especially the thing about extremism. I don't know how I'd put it into practice, but it's something to consider.

I do know what you mean.  It is strange how that one thing they don't have suddenly feels really important.  C'est la vie!

[Wiseman2]

Having a list may rule out completely compatible and lovely people. It could also make someone who 'checks all the boxes' seem better than they really are.

Some standard likes dislikes deal breakers and red flags are good to have as guidelines, but ridgid or trivial criteria could rule out otherwise fine people.

For example what if it's Mr or Ms right, but they're not into pet names? Next them?

[Alpacalia]

You'll go a long way if you combine your search for character (standards) with acceptance.

You just have to feel into the situation.

If it feels nice to you, you're on the right route with this person.

Leave it alone if you're turned off by, say, terrible table manners.

You are who you are, and they are who they are.

I also think a good rule to follow is trying not to impose standards to others that you could not apply to yourself.