Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,161 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What qualities, behaviors, judgements or what ever do you think help one make a good assessment of a suitable romantic partner or friend?


For some background, I was thinking about how some women end up in fucked up relationships where at first a person was charming but it soon becomes toxic. From which, one's trust in their own judgement seems to be rocked and doubted as to whether one can properly discern good partners/people from bad.
Two things come to my mind:
1) That one develops an internalized sense of what feels right and comfortable for them, even in terms of it being bad based on their childhood experiences. One's relation to one's parents sets a felt blueprint for relating to people in general and how one responds to things. A person with a domineering mother might for example be quite passive and dependent in an adult relationship because they were so suppressed they didn't develop the natural state of asserting themselves for example.

2) There's manipulation on the part of some people that would require an acute awareness to avoid their initial charms, not only of them but one's own circumstance.

2 seems to intersect with 1 in that I think they could vary and can't be considered in isolation as they relate to one another if they truly hold relevance for this. But i'm thinking with 1 that one has emotional reactions to things, and being propelled by feelings may not use their head enough and fall into relations that they did in the past that weren't good for them. This meaning that one should perhaps be skeptical of one's feelings, not denying them but trying to evaluate things more explicitly or that one needs to try and cultivate a new felt sense. Which may have occurred as a result of the past experiences being negative that one then has a felt sense to avoid somethings due to its association wit a past figure, in which case one's feelings are still a good guide and to ignore them would be problematic.
In regards to 2, it seems that in the early stages, some are great at cultivating an image that is charming and in retrospect we may wonder how anyone would fall for someone who in the end was so terrible, but lose sight of how prior to that retrospective view, there wasn't clear signs to alert ones self and make them cautious.

In the end, what I'm wondering is how does one cultivate a balanced sense of finding a partner that is reasonable to themselves. Is it perhaps random in some sense, that some tendencies are restrictive but protective in their risk aversion like waiting longer to move things along in the relationship. I suppose this might get into the realm of red flags thread, and it might be useful to mention them, but the focus is one one's own judgements and the process of how one evaluates a person. Which isn't necessarily the same as asking what makes a good partner, because that would simply be the conclusion of one's judgement but not an explicit awareness of how one ends up at the conclusion.

I like to think I have a reasonable judgement based on my feelings of good and bad people, but following this I have bumped into some cases where I was to generous too quick with people I clearly didn't know well enough causing a shock to my confidence in seeing people as they are. And it also makes me think of how one might have an idealized image of someone in their head, and this is often emphasized when one is having positive feelings towards someone to some degree, but when one is having conflict and problems one has a keener eye on what is in order to discern the nature of the problem. So it's not apparent how good a guide emotions are, which are perhaps nice heuristically, one could tick all the criteria of being attractive and good but still lack a felt chemistry, so something has to be there. But of course relying too much on emotion seems to set one up to a roller coaster being thrown around by where ever one's emotions drive them unmediated by reason and sense.
This just kind of comes out of thinking of how nice people I know have ended up in some terrible relationships and its sad to see their sense of judgement put under such doubt that they feel that they can't trust themselves or the risk of another necessarily. Being hurt making a person a cynic because they were hurt so deeply they cut themselves off from the world rather than remain open to it, for possibility of something good rather than closed down by fear. But such talk of hope and that doesn't guarantee one won't be subject to another prickish person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,012 Posts
My daughter came to me with some relationship interview questions for a class.

"How do you think you determine who a good partner is"

I looked at her and laughed. Eh well clearly that was not a strength of mine younger. I hope for you that you don't make sacrifices for things in your life that will take you away from your own opportunities. I told her the greatest contribution she can not only make to herself but also a relationship is by feeling like an equal party. And how she achieves that is by not sacrificing her education or things that can establish a career. I explained to her that imo a good partner not only supports that but wants to encourage that success because if they truly see you as a more permanent love interest they want you to be able to offer security and quality achieved thru taking care of your own interests initially.

I told her watching how someone treats OTHERs not just her is a good way to observe a lot. And discern who they are when they have comfort and think no one is watching.

A lot of times the person who has your genuine interest at heart might be right in front of your face and just a good friend, kind, and patient and you may not even realize it.

I think tho warning signs I missed (which I know the reason) were people who asked too much of me. What I mean is like acclimating to their lives (instead of mutual). That is not a good sign. When I think back that was my big red flag I missed while the charm was still high. Someone who makes a lot of suggestions that mean a lot of compromise on your end or reliance can very easily isolate you.

Another red flag oppressive toxic people give off while they are usually still charming is tiny one liners that make you question family or friends. (Even if your family or friends are shit) if they give off a pattern of subtle comments regularly (not just them discussing one toxic person). Ironically a really manipulating person will often try and get to you initially thru the same friends. If someone tries really hard to make an impression thru your friends that's totally a PUA move for one but two watch if they later talk shit continually and make suggestions to turn you against a friend. You're easier to control alone.

What do you need if you're susceptible to attracting toxic people like this and not being able to distinguish the difference I believe to separate yourself from dating. My largest emphasis to my daughters is always developing and preserving your own identity and interests. Having your own strong goals for yourself is key. (These are things I did not have so it made it easier to compromise myself younger). It's a huge reason I invest a major chunk of parenting energy in cultivating their own specific interests and planting various seeds of opportunity and paths they can take so they KNOW constantly their value and all the opportunities the world offers them. If they follow them.

My point is it's not just other culprits and distinguishing toxic people. Some of the esteem is based inside the self and it creates a tougher exterior. Toxic people usually look for vulnerable people who lack self esteem or good support systems. So the real emphasis I have here is cultivating your own interests. When I left my last very toxic longest lasting relationship at the end of my 20s I had a flight or fight mentality. I think many people don't realize young women who enter these relationships often left unstable homes like that. So it's something that has to be taught. I entered my first shitty relationship when my mom kicked me out at 17 because I would not call her a bitch (yeah you read that right) she kept screaming at me to say it because I was calling her a hypocrite when she smacked me and swore at me and kept challenging me to 'do it' I walked out to her screaming to stay out. So when I walked to my boyfriends and he offered me some drugs was I really in any position with esteem or support system or direction to give a fuck. No. I didn't care. It's not like I seen the future. I seen only then. I never imagined having daughters Which would require me to be a role model to. Point with that is more so a message to young people in really toxic home lives you have to find a reason to care about yourself other wise it will only get worse.

What is the message in all of that having a vision for yourself and standards and not letting bad incidents propel you not to care.

What made me care again (my daughters). Because I want better for them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,512 Posts
I look at how a guy acts before I get into a relationship with him. There's plenty of guys who wouldn't talk to other girls just because they can even though it's unofficial. Like the guy I'm talking to now who I'm long distance with...he doesn't go around taking cuddly pics with other girls even though he's far away. I've had other guys thinking they can do that just because it isn't anything.

I see if he's really into getting to know me or if he'll play around.

Sometimes, I purposely introduce another single girl friend of mine to a crush to see if he'll entertain her and they wind up talking instead of saying, oh it's inappropriate I'm getting to know your one friend...that just tells me that's not the one.

A person who is really into me wouldn't be trying to date any girl whether I know her or not.

I also look for how many children a person has by how many different people...if a guy has 2 or more baby mamas, I really don't think that would be good husband material...it shows he can't commit or he picked shitty girls to have children with instead of protecting himself and was irresponsible.

I don't have any kids for that reason so I don't have to be tied down to someone I don't want to see ever again.

Also, I look to see if a person is into God...if they're not into God, chances are, they'll believe in divorce and so I'm not going to take a chance on someone that doesn't believe in God.

I look to see their political views also...that shows me whether or not they follow rules and respect laws no matter who is president.
--And right now, that's a deal breaker with the guy I'm talking to far away...his political views suck, but I'm hoping he will see the error of his ideology later on.

I look to see if a person is reliable. Often times, once someone has moved, they have stopped talking to me and didn't make any efforts to even still stay friends. Just because I moved or they moved doesn't mean we stop being friends. I can't count on someone who bails out when things get tough.

Mainly...I'm looking for a reliable person, not a flaky one who constantly changes his mind. Found too many flakes in the past who like to argue with me about "not" wanting to talk to me yet try to get back in my life later on...don't have time for that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,482 Posts
Well, that's basically one of the broadest questions you could ask on relations.

I don't think there's a magic way to recognize good friends and partners. Experience helps, and learning to check your assumptions, and learning to recognize when you're projecting. Also having a realistic view of people (which is definitely not the same as cynical), more in the sense that perfect people don't exist.

When you do get into a situation where someone crosses a line, there's just no substitute for assertiveness and self-respect. Confrontations are hard for some people - but if you can't stand up for yourself you just have a higher risk of being abused. That's just something that everyone has to learn, otherwise you'll basically just have to get lucky. Can indeed be hard if you've been overprotected, growing up.

Never accepting abusiveness from someone, even if it's not directed at you. Don't accept any reason for that behavior.

Also, needing relations is very human, and there's incredible social pressure to have them, but don't be so dependent on having friends/partners that you will accept anything as long as you're not alone. Learning how to be fine by yourself and taking care of yourself puts you in a much healthier position in all your relations. In this INTJs view :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,418 Posts
I know that a person is a suitable friend or romantic partner for me when being around them transforms me into a better version of myself.

It's not about them having specific traits as much as the blending of our personalities. When you blend two compatible personalities together, both people end up improving each others lives and end up becoming a better version of themselves.
But when you blend two incompatible personalities together, both people end up becoming a worse version of themselves, like one of them might end up abusing the other (and this is the reason why abusers only abuse certain people and not everyone).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Good thread. Problem, Title: "own judgments" then words like: "...think I have a reasonable judgement based on my feelings of good and bad people". I'm not critizicing just saying that many times we mix judgement with feelings, but hey nature has a way to turn signs into emotions, just like fear towards a predator. I read a nice book about the psychology of fear on risk sports. Long story short we can't trust those feelings, we must develop a cold head to understand fear doesn't equal real danger, and in other cases fear goes away replaced by something else (but the danger remains). I believe during love relationships we might develop and loose feelings of danger so we must fight to stay objective and seeing the evidence that comes over time again and again.

This just kind of comes out of thinking of how nice people I know have ended up in some terrible relationships
I know people (and dated some) that ended being terrible persons (not exactly meaning terrible relationships). Some ended up getting married (hell), so I think of the waitress example. I always pay attention how the person I'm dating treats service people, it's been said it's a projection of how they are going to treat you over time. But hey, this doesn't mean pay attention during one week. I've seen people being really nice FOR ONE YEAR and then acting like jerks with service people.

What qualities, behaviors, judgements or what ever do you think help one make a good assessment of a suitable romantic partner or friend?
Usually, shitty family relationships = shitty love relationships for you in the future

You know, you just said you loved troubled people no matter what and then tell them is their fault. See what I did there? ok, I really focus on the ability of people to tell recent past events AS THEY HAPPENED. I've seen people unable to reconstruct a conversation, I mean they get mad due to words you never said, sometimes because they are stupid, other times because some fear get in the way but this is way important. You can't have a relationship with someone who twists words during a conversation, specially during an argument. So I do pay deep attention on this while I get to know this person.

I grew up with a narcissistic mother, can you imagine how many times words about blame or guilt were used? I don't use them and I developed a strong sense to them. They have a function but in human terms they are used in destructive ways. So yes I focus on that a lot, and guess what? trouble people (only problematic people) accused me of using them when I actually don't. So read the previous point. I even had phone recorded calls to prove the things I never said, some people are shit.


I could go on, I have some more but I will cut to make this post shorter. This is also about shoes. You won't know unless you wear those shoes, it might take 1 year to find out something. You have to wear the shoes and walkin them. People are like that. Some people turn into their hated parent and don't notice it, takes therapy to see it, sure you being the love parter will see it right away. Then you have people who tell you is your fault (another word I don't use) because "you didn't notice on time", well is not always like that. Psychology books but specially psychology professionals can tell you amazing stories of how well people HIDE their worst deffects out of fear on rejection.

- visit her workplace
- try to be home with family on special occassions
- uninvited can be gold... will reveal a lot
- get there before time because "there was no traffic"
- use humor, sometimes people hide their own feelings, make jokes and you might discover something
- watch films together and wait for her projection to appear (projecting is amazing)

Dicuss delicate matters and see how she picks it, some people can distort stories right away. As you see my approach is exploring and keep exploring. What people do is important, but the most difficult task is finding why they do the things they do: motivations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
When you do get into a situation where someone crosses a line, there's just no substitute for assertiveness and self-respect. Confrontations are hard for some people
Nice. I started developing interest and preference over two things.

1. Don't avoid confrontations, wait for them. They reveal a lot, in fact confrontations or arguments ARE NOT BAD, they can be a healthy crash between two worlds allowing you both to get to know each other. They are very valuable and are not the end of relationships, or a bad sign, is like being nude trying to solve a sex position: it can be weird but there you see if both can cooperate. The most valuable thing after this is how you get along after it.

2. Sometimes... avoid your natural reactions (crossing the line). I'm not entirely happy with this but I learned how people can cross the line doing or saying something (or telling a story of the past) and you won't see the next lines if you react on the first one. Sometimes is not "a line" sometimes there are several one after the other. You can discover so much more, I used to tolerate based on bad reasons, then found good reasons to do so and explore. A friend (psychologist) took time to explain how people want in some way or another to reveal themselves to you but many times we don't want to listen, and is ok we put a stop to abusive behavior but sometimes our reaction makes this person stop, correct and hide the problem. Let things flow while you get to know people and you will be amazed.

I have dated the long time best friends of friends, and got amazing revelations of their past just because I wasn't judging, I was listening and open to explore.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2015
Joined
·
10,435 Posts
It's been beneficial to me to figure out what my personal boundaries are, and why. They may not be the same as other people's - they might draw their lines there, I draw them here. I think that can poison relationships too - caving to group think or just individual opinions when it comes to "good" and "bad" ...cue the if you were "good" then you would be doing this and that arguments (when maybe it's honestly not even important to you), or hmm, I just don't feel good around this person, though they're seemingly doing everything right, so maybe I should stick this out and the problem is me (when maybe it is you, but they just don't click with what you want or need on some level)... or whatever.

I think it can create a certain fear too, because when your standards aren't your own, you're not as equipped to confidently deal with situations as they arise. Gambles feel riskier. Defenses you maybe truly do believe in can make you feel foolish anyway (your loyalties aren't your own decision anymore). You're on the look out for supposedly objective trustworthiness (or something?) rather than just getting to know the person and then trusting them to be themselves (and determining whether that's something you can personally deal with and properly respond to in a way that's organic for you). Etc.

I've grown more confident in that you can often pick up on some of the more important stuff fairly quickly, at least ime. To me, that's whether you feel less yourself around the person (energetically diminished in some way, censored... unaccepted?), whether power (and therefore respect really) feels uneven, yada yada. (That doesn't necessarily go hand in hand either, which adds complication to this all. lol. I've known people I've felt unaccepted around for whatever reason who made me feel... alive. As if my self and power were still being respected and met on some level. I've also known people who's conflict resolution strategies or whatever else differed from mine to the point where I was left feeling drained by them anyway, despite their reassurances of acceptance).

And that all doesn't mean that the person's a bad person necessarily, but just maybe bad for you. Further - I think this is very timing based too. People can be good or bad for you depending on where you're at in life and your journey imo. I believe in honoring bonds (or trying to) despite that, but I'm more temperamental now in my decisions to form those bonds in the first place. When those bonds are more "now" based I think that they're stronger though, and easier to honor. They're tied to more positive associations and feelings. And because of that, it's easier to tap into when it feels like they should be severed. Idk if that makes sense (to even me xD). Will have to think about what I mean by that... Somehow I think authenticity and depth factor in. (Though I feel like trauma bonds can be formed in the same way by those factors alone... positive feelings and associations are key in that differentiation - and positive feelings are an individual experience. Might help to put them under the microscope of psychoanalysis tho).
 

·
MOTM Jan 2015
Joined
·
10,435 Posts
Good thread. Problem, Title: "own judgments" then words like: "...think I have a reasonable judgement based on my feelings of good and bad people". I'm not critizicing just saying that many times we mix judgement with feelings, but hey nature has a way to turn signs into emotions, just like fear towards a predator. I read a nice book about the psychology of fear on risk sports. Long story short we can't trust those feelings, we must develop a cold head to understand fear doesn't equal real danger, and in other cases fear goes away replaced by something else (but the danger remains). I believe during love relationships we might develop and loose feelings of danger so we must fight to stay objective and seeing the evidence that comes over time again and again.
Feelings go beyond a fear response though, like you're pointing out. I think that's what I was getting at with my post. Rather than essentially project into the future (I feel like this person is likely to be safe, or I feel like this person is likely to be dangerous), it's helpful to drop into those now feelings, and weigh their pros and cons against your values-wants-needs (everyone has the potential to be safe or dangerous, so ultimately - are they worth it?)

Like - this person makes me laugh all the time (even if no one else gets it lol) and that makes me feel good. Laughing is important to me in a relationship. Survey says good.

Or maybe people think this person is sort of a d*ck, but I think they're kinda brave... and I personally respect that and feel good in it's presence. Weighing pros and cons individual decides - good.

I think ultimately it does come down to feelings for most - whether the good outweigh the bad. And further, intensity of those feelings and your energy around the person. (Some might prefer ups and downs (hopefully more so ups) if the ups peak higher, to a steady, lower "good" they view as bland - others might not).

Drawing the lines for when those judgments occur (at what point is good against bad weighed?) is tricky though. Especially if you aren't letting a fear response dictate where those lines occur (like you said - it can be beneficial to push past that to further explore. But if not that to help you decide - then what and when?)
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,448 Posts
Most humanoids are utilizing 'subjective'- fight styles (and high-functioning personal preferences), to which removes any 'objective' // highly reliable and/or accurate judgment process of partners regardless, although it seems specimens are relatively more comfortable & confident in such states, because humans are ultimately primitively wired for such states reflexively, and telling a humanoid not to trust their intuition - (let it go) when it comes to making surface-correlations in such intimate-settings, the brain may get 'scrambled' & the subject may simply end up malfunctioning [or seeming serverely dysfunctional] to other participants:

One could say such formalities removes the 'humanity' of the date (because it removes the stupidity from the person); which in spite of such defective-high functioning human-stupidities [it is still a preferred state], nonetheless.

 

Ex;

'I do not want date a robot!'

::


Which is why most specimens are satisfied with:

"Either you like me, or you don't?"

__________________

And simply shrug & can submit to such a judgment with supreme confidence when told:

"Okay, I really just don't like you - we may not click,"


Whether it be true, or not. However, just because the specimen is utilizing high-functioning heuristic / correlational "intuitive"-data does not mean that said outcomes are sub-optimal for the agent:


Because making high-functioning correlations between patternized behavior(s) / events in the environment is a vastly 'functional / beneficial' and continuously demonstrated, easily accessible reflexive-surival mechanism demonstrated to be reliable technique across the board or almost all humans, that demonstrates humans do not necessary need to go into deeper (analysis) of their judgement-calls or extract-deep reasons; to have good judgment, and that I can conclude Pete & I "simply won't work out," because he is demonstrably narcissist or something. I mean, look at him.

And while humanoid(s) do not need deeper analysis to make good-judgment calls, (or to "function" properly) because I think most specimens are simply after functionality, (& taking mental / physical-short cuts), rather than formulating rational/reasons.


I utilize a somewhat pseudo-scientific method to find common-ground via more counterintuitive-approach which likely does not work as well as intented, & [which may seem like gibberish] to another humanoid - which isn't necessarily problematic when it comes to 'assessing' what is most harmful to the agent themselves via complex-psychological affairs: one that does not 'ruin' my heavily intuitive nature (as I am entirely a "vibe") humanoid - and prefer to date many specimens regardless of 'discomforts' :: as I find "dating" in general a sufficient part of the trial/experimentation process for gaining pseudo-knowledge via humanoid(s) in psychologically-complex circumstances:

Which I suppose is reflective in my "serial-dating," tendencies - but not extreme desire to settle just because the humanoid is a 'good person'. (Although such 'serial-dating' experimentation / trial & error) has sufficiently strengthen my judgment-accuracy, in so far as I can more accurately identifiy sub-optimal / optimal behaviors - regardless of the overall 'good nature' of the specimen in question which to another specimen is: shallow

Since their 'dating' process seems to skip the vital parts of the process itself (that dating isn't to "get to know someone," it is to find a husband) - which I think is a self-defeatist / dangerous method, personally in so far assolidifying (X)-judgments in a more hands/on trial + error method, but based off intuitive-magical thinking [that restricts more than constraints].

Which lead(s) to more self-defeatist 'upset optimism' (re: rather than being prepared for a diverse-set of situations), via more magical-thinking.


 


Make an observation.

Ask a question.

Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.

Test the prediction.


(Usually in the form of 'dating' / friendship-social outings').

Use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.


The Bayesian of probability method to behavioral-sciences is (one approach) that specimen(s) can utilize via 'patternizing' to asses whether a specimen is a "bad apple," or not, which is commonly used in the legal-system in criminality to assess criminals (and to which extent they are 'threats' to others) when be released into the general-public populace - although, I reckon most agents are simply not willing to go such extents nor have the time: (but I think it is only necessary to worry about 'good judgments' when it comes to severe pathologies [and not so much 'idle manipulations'] such as push-up bras [and idle insecurities / other basic-human flaws/stupidities] -


Bayesian methods are characterized by concepts and procedures as follows:

The use of random variables, or more generally unknown quantities,[8] to model all sources of uncertainty in statistical models including uncertainty resulting from lack of information (see also aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty).


The need to determine the prior probability distribution taking into account the available (prior) information.


The sequential use of Bayes' formula: when more data become available, calculate the posterior distribution using Bayes' formula; subsequently, the posterior distribution becomes the next prior.


While for the frequentist a hypothesis is a proposition (which must be either true or false), so that the frequentist probability of a hypothesis is either 0 or 1, in Bayesian statistics the probability that can be assigned to a hypothesis can also be in a range from 0 to 1 if the truth value is uncertain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,276 Posts
Can only provide this from my perspective since I'm uncertain that it can be applied universally. It's patterns of behaviour and how often their pattern breaks, that gain or reduce my trust in people. My bullshit-dar works pretty well, lol.

That said, my weakness is gentleness, vulnerability and openness from another which calls to the softness and caring within me. When this happens, I tend to throw myself wide open to them, in order to properly empathise. The ones with learned helplessness can be passive-aggressive assholes and when I'm wide open, it hurts like nothing else.

So, to summarise, I don't have the answers but I do know that I'm very resilient, hence have and will continue to survive and thrive!
 

·
MOTM Jan 2015
Joined
·
10,435 Posts
Since their 'dating' process seems to skip the vital parts of the process itself (that dating isn't to "get to know someone," it is to find a husband) - which I think is a self-defeatist / dangerous method, personally in so far assolidifying (X)-judgments in a more hands/on trial + error method, but based off intuitive-magical thinking [that restricts more than constraints].
I followed a lot of this, but I am curious - if the ultimate objective isn't to find a husband (or a partner in some respect) - what is the point of the experimentation process? Why bother to get to know the person(s) at all? Even if you are getting to know them simply to add to a (more extensive) database, isn't that still for the sake of assessing potential partners with greater accuracy for the end goal of eventually deciding on one?

If a person were not actually tied to this objective, what would be irrational about an I don't want to get to know you because I don't have anything specifically driving me to (I don't feel like it - it's not clicking (maybe the reasoning included?) for me) conclusion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,008 Posts
I followed a lot of this, but I am curious - if the ultimate objective isn't to find a husband (or a partner in some respect) - what is the point of the experimentation process? Why bother to get to know the person(s) at all? Even if you are getting to know them simply to add to a (more extensive) database, isn't that still for the sake of assessing potential partners with greater accuracy for the end goal of eventually deciding on one?

If a person were not actually tied to this objective, what would be irrational about an I don't want to get to know you because I don't have anything specifically driving me to (I don't feel like it - it's not clicking (maybe the reasoning included?) for me) conclusion?
So much overthinking. Meeting new people is fun and challenging and not boring. More reasons not required.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2015
Joined
·
10,435 Posts
So much overthinking. Meeting new people is fun and challenging and not boring. More reasons not required.
I was responding to a post, which seemed to imply that more reasons are required.

And meeting new people isn't always fun, challenging, and not boring. It depends on the person. Or maybe it's challenging but not fun, fun but kinda boring-not challenging (not particularly stimulating), not boring but not fun... you know.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,448 Posts
I followed a lot of this, but I am curious - if the ultimate objective isn't to find a husband (or a partner in some respect) - what is the point of the experimentation process?
I reckon such objectives are back-burned into the (subconscious) - rather than expressed in the concsious as good "reasons," to (date) for myself, because I suppose I am heavily relient on ('vibes') when it comes to exclusively humans (&) when such vibes are working well—(any other [conscious] end-goal such as 'dating for a husband / dating for a long-term boyfriend'), seems distracting / unnecessary—because ::

"Either we work, or we do not," [and no one specimen seems to have the same/equal 'frequency'] as the one before—(&) perhaps that was not articulated [coherently] via the above post. Which is [cut-short] saying that while simply making notable intuitive- correlations between environmental-markers on the terrian (e.g., something is 'off' about John-there is no way we can get along); does not imply that such correlations are 'wrong' (or necessarily dysfunctional to the specimen utilizing them, if the patterns are demonstrably consistent / observable:

Ex; (1)


"Something is off about John - we won't work out; because he cannot keep eye contact!" (Because Susan's main requirement to feel 'desired' is strong eye-contact).




And the 'experimentation process,' (re: going out with John) - (is a pseudo-counterintuintive) approach to solidify in the long-run, John can in fact, hold "strong eye contact with Susan," - but only after he's gotten to know her better, to which Susan, indeed, turns out to fancy John rather well.

Remind(s) me of this thread - [and the attempts to dismantle / undermine intuitive approaches in general - (and why suggesting that specimen / or any human 'turn-off' said intuitive-thinking) is dangerous for the humanoid is so far as it reduces a (demonstrably reliable) survival mechanism [when it comes to 'survival'] in general. So perhaps, a certainty involving "good / perfect / the best" judgment is not necessarily required to distinguish a 'good' from 'bad' person for the unique individual intuiting it.


______________

However, I think the 'experimentation' part (as I said in my above post) is more distracting when fixating on the word itself rather than what it actually entail(s); (because most humans do not fancy the idea of being 'experimented' with) - although I think it more or less occurs as a subconscious-mating strategy with or without (formal dating) being considered. Thus can manifest as 'manipulative' behavior(s) - or other facades, which I do not have much of a problem with because (demonstrably) the primitive-human respond(s) best to this, because the human-brain is simply wired that way "first & foremost," [before it is wired to dig deeper into psychoanalysis of the participants involved].

(&) this "strong psychoanalysis," [of who is 'good or bad' for me] is more optimizing when it is working with counterintuitive-approaches; rather just intuitive-vibes for reduction of stress (&) hit or miss circumstances (&) these "hit or miss," circumstances - can ultimately become circular [the person is always, always, dating], for instance: which is perhaps my own problem as a serial-datist, where it has it's down fall - that I am so fixated on intuition (&) "vibes," I feel entirely safe / secure in said "vibes" as well;

That 'as soon as he doesn't feel right,' I can floor it break any 'foundation' that was there (&) hit the road. Although, it is not something I am necessarliy driven to correct, since I fancy the pragmaticism/opportunism nonetheless.



Why bother to get to know the person(s) at all? Even if you are getting to know them simply to add to a (more extensive) database, isn't that still for the sake of assessing potential partners with greater accuracy for the end goal of eventually deciding on one?
I guess it comes in 'degrees' of knowing someone - for myself; that I can "get to know someone," and (learn about them) before introducing any kind of intimacy on my part (&) there is a distinction between 'knowing intimate things about John' and 'knowing John intimately', (&) such distinction(s) can manifest via 'dating' (&) between daters.

Ex; (2)


"I have been talking to John for 3 months non-stop, I know every detail about John (and some personal-things) as well, I can accurately tell you John's birthday, mother's death date - (&) what he is allergic to," without necessarily feeling an intimate bond / connection to John - although I can conclude that we would be a 'ideal match'. Which is where the {vibes} come into play, that the 'make or break' is on vibes, rather than information absorbed.


[Or]


"I know John only to the extent of what he has told; which as always been 'shallow' non-intimate talk; or rampant flirting without substance (&) the occasional 'late night conversation" - but really nothing intriguing, intimately / sentimentally private - such as 'emotional' openness being [shared] equally by both participant(s) - even if the other participant has no conscious awareness of 'how closed off' the other specimen actually is.



If a person were not actually tied to this objective, what would be irrational about an I don't want to get to know you because I don't have anything specifically driving me to (I don't feel like it - it's not clicking (maybe the reasoning included?) for me) conclusion?
I agree here; [for the unique individual] that there needn't be extra reason(s) beyond intuitive-vibe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,008 Posts
I was responding to a post, which seemed to imply that more reasons are required.

And meeting new people isn't always fun, challenging, and not boring. It depends on the person. Or maybe it's challenging but not fun, fun but kinda boring-not challenging (not particularly stimulating), not boring but not fun... you know.
Yes, I know overthinking when I see overthinking.

I am going at it in a different way. The simplistic way: "I do it because I want to do this."
 

·
MOTM Jan 2015
Joined
·
10,435 Posts
"Something is off about John - we won't work out; because he cannot keep eye contact!" (Because Susan's main requirement to feel 'desired' is strong eye-contact).

And the 'experimentation process,' (re: going out with John) - (is a pseudo-counterintuintive) approach to solidify in the long-run, John can in fact, hold "strong eye contact with Susan," - but only after he's gotten to know her better, to which Susan, indeed, turns out to fancy John rather well.
Maybe Susan's primary objective is to feel desired though, not necessarily to find a partner or husband (which would be secondary - if it's an objective at all). "I want to feel desired, I do not feel desired, we don't work out now, and I have no incentive to continue to invest in this person for the sake of an outcome that exists in the realm of potentiality" - if Susan were having difficulty finding and acquiring desire as an objective, further exploration may be useful, if she were not - and viewed foundation building and breaking as an unnecessary expenditure of time and energy without the exchange of momentary reward - there would be valid reasoning in her simply moving on to someone who makes eye contact. Determining whether he otherwise fit partner criteria and could meet this specific criteria in time would only be necessary if she were indeed ultimately looking for a husband (partner), or otherwise had motivation to put in additional effort to meet her goal.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2015
Joined
·
10,435 Posts
Yes, I know overthinking when I see overthinking.

I am going at it in a different way. The simplistic way: "I do it because I want to do this."
What you don't seem to know when you see it is the context of a post ;P

Granted, my response may have been unclear. I'm ultimately defending your "simplistic way" against criticisms of magical thinking. There's reasoning for it just as there can be reasoning for compiling a database - though, to me ...it seems that this reasoning would be less about finding a partner as an overarching objective (an assertion that seemed to be made which I was responding to), and that compiling a database would be for this purpose (despite claims (?) that it's not).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I've personally sort of combined yours and @Catwalk's approaches. I see dating somewhat as database compilation and experimentation too, though my database is maybe more... focused? I've narrowed my criteria for when I will or won't continue to bother adding to someone's individual profile, essentially (I have to want to date them in the now). My database has sort of become a specific - yet broad - profile that several men have fit in one way or another, filling in puzzle pieces. (Rather than get to know several men individually more extensively who fit different, broader profiles). (Ya follow? LOL ...that's an honest question btw, I'm trying to stay within the realm of the analogy without being too confusing).

But yes, "fun, challenging, not boring" are important for me in wanting to do something too. But no, I don't simply see "meeting people" as a guarantee of meeting those goals. Especially since I'd like to ideally meet them all at once in a partner (as of now) if I also "want" to find and invest in one.

Examples for when that's not being achieved:

Challenging but not fun: Unequal distribution of power, i.e. the challenge seems to be mostly on your end, or the focus has become the goal of acquisition as a challenge, despite the trade off of in the moment energy diminishment, repression of "self", not feeling you're being viewed as a challenge worth meeting in return, etc.

Conclusion: Not worth continuing to get to know for the sake of making them a partner.

May be worth: Meeting challenges for the sake of experimentation and better [as Catwalk would say - humanoid - lol] understanding.

Fun but not challenging: The experience with the person is pleasant, but almost feels platonic, the "spark" is missing, i.e. they aren't particularly valuable in adding a component of exploration or change to your life, no large romantic loss would be felt by the absence of their presence.

Conclusion: Not worth continuing to get to know for the sake of making them a partner.

May be worth: Enjoying their company for as long as it remains enjoyable.

Not boring but not fun: You agree to go to their friend's vacation house on a first date due to the fact that it does seem atypical, potentially risky, and "not boring" - you witness domestic abuse, fear for the safety of your new car, mildly suspect that their friend is a closeted gay dude who's into your date - and wonder if that's reciprocated (maybe that one's an anecdote? ...lol).

Conclusion: Not worth continuing to get to know for the sake of making them a partner.

May be worth: Going out with for a story.

So doing what I want and wanting to find a partner don't necessarily go hand in hand. The "may be worth's" are conflicting too if they become extended missions with specific individuals as they feel like using people to me. I prefer to spend my (continued) time with people bonding with them and upholding my own end of a relationship deal (being a good friend-partner in whatever respect, especially dependent on the extent (depth and length) of the bond, etc - if I don't think I can or want to do that, I'd rather cut them loose at a shallow bond... less time and energy required).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
I do not trust my judgment of who is suitable. What I do is to approach slowly if interaction is interesting and as a consequence empirically test.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top