A survey about relationships

[MasterShakezula]

For those who don't watch How I Met Your Mother: A reach-er is a person who's with someone above their league and a settler is one who's with someone below their league.

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

I've never really believed in "leagues". We're all people, pretty simply.

[obscure]

maybe there are some leagues but it's certainly not a criterion I or my heart follows.... went with 2cool 

[rumborak]

I have this friend who utterly believes in the notion of "league", to the level that it's self-defeating ("nah, no point in talking to her, she's out of my league"). At the same time he always says that he has no idea how I manage to successfully date "out of my league". I tell him it's because I don't believe in leagues, but it never sinks in.
For me it's really very broad. I need to be physically and mentally attracted to her, but then really anything goes.

rumborak

[lonestar]

Where's the "Obscure" option?

[MasterShakezula]

It's here as of right now.

[obscure]

Awwwwww 

 

[Ħ]

I don't want to be with someone I'm unattracted to, but I don't want to be with a beauty queen.   I couldn't deal with the constant feeling of being inferior.

[rumborak]

I couldn't deal with the constant feeling of wanting to bone her. Gotta get other shit done too, you know.

rumborak

[Orbert]

I have insanely high standards for everything.  I know what I like in a woman, I know what I like in a best friend, and I know what I would like in a life partner.  These three are related but not exactly the same in choosing a spouse.

I also am realistic enough to know that there is no "perfect woman", and waiting for her to come along, or actively seeking her, would be a waste of time.  No woman is going to just happen to satisfy all requirements.  Therefore I decided long ago that the one area I would relax my stupid self-imposed standards is in the area of relationships.  I would "settle".  I cannot expect someone to have the same work ethic as me.  I cannot expect someone to have the same taste in music, food, TV or cinema.  Same political views, same ideas on children and education, etc.  Any of these would be nice plusses, but none can be "requirements" because you could easily rule out someone who otherwise is perfect for you, or at least the best you're gonna get in this sorry life.

I honestly believe that I work harder than she does to make it work.  I honestly believe that she doesn't care as much about the details as I do.  I honestly believe that I would be happier if she just did this or did that, even once in a while.  But I also know that that makes me an asshole, so I suck it up and life goes on.  I have settled.

[TL]

I've always felt the notion of simplifying people down to such basic notions and terms to be stupid, and honestly almost borderline offensive.

[BlobVanDam]

I voted for reacher, because I don't think a girl in my "league" would be very good.
But mostly I voted that because like rumby, I don't like to think of "leagues" as a solid concept that defines who I can go for.

[rumborak]

I also am realistic enough to know that there is no "perfect woman", and waiting for her to come along, or actively seeking her, would be a waste of time.  No woman is going to just happen to satisfy all requirements.  Therefore I decided long ago that the one area I would relax my stupid self-imposed standards is in the area of relationships.  I would "settle".  I cannot expect someone to have the same work ethic as me.  I cannot expect someone to have the same taste in music, food, TV or cinema.  Same political views, same ideas on children and education, etc. 

IMHO, really only the list in the last sentence matters for a relationship. All the other stuff, I would argue that it's actually better if the partner has different views on those things. I'm not interested in dating a clone of mine; I am much more interested in meeting someone who has their own ideas and notions of things.

rumborak

[KevShmev]

Having out kicked my coverage quite a few times in the past , I guess I'll go with a reacher.

It sure isn't the other, as I am often accused of being too picky, but I simply refuse to lower my standards.  Right or wrong, that's the way I am.

[lonestar]

As a man of tremendously low self esteem, I am definatly a reacher, they all seem out of my class.

[Fluffy Lothario]

I've never really believed in "leagues". We're all people, pretty simply.

Kind of this, and it's reflected itself in my girlfriends. Friends have told me I've had girlfriends where their jaws dropped and others where they would have reached for a flamethrower werre there one nearby.


And this is a perfect example of why I absolutely cannot stand that fucking show. It's so desperately pseudo-intellectual about relationships, dating, etc, creating terms and categories and claiming everyone can conveniently fit into two or three little boxes or things are always like this and that and generally acting like an authority, when really, they're just constantly over-generalising, dressing up half-truths or pulling utter shit straight out of their asses.

It's like the show's co-written by Cosmopolitan or Girlfriend, but because all of their drivel is coming from Barney Stinson and the other lame characters and they're so damn hilarious, people eat it up.

[Phantasmatron]

I voted "equal standing" because I don't really believe in leagues, either, so that option seemed closest to my opinion.

[sonatafanica]

um i dunno i usually date girls who are painfully gorgeous but they also hate me so uh yeah i dunno

i really haven't had an emotion for a girl other than "oh let's see where this goes this might be fun" in quite a while so i may not be qualified to answer this question

[Zantera]

I went with equal, probably because of the paranoia that a more beautiful girl would start looking at other guys. 

[hefdaddy42]

I don't believe in leagues.  I'm just deliriously happy with my wife.

[King Postwhore]

There isn't "leagues"  Love has no boundaries.   When it's right, it's right.

[YtseBitsySpider]

Awwwwww 

 

Easy vote.

[obscure]

 

[MasterShakezula]

I dislike how your post count is no longer 4 2s in a row.

[Scrub206]

ahahaha i love that episode of how i met your mother xD

[obscure]

I dislike how your post count is no longer 4 2s in a row.

 

I'm pretty much obsessed with post counts as well....







this should have been Maiden instead of Megadeth tho...

[mizzl]

I've never really believed in "leagues". We're all people, pretty simply.

This

[ReaperKK]

Had to go with the obscure option.

[WindMaster]

I don't want to be with someone I'm unattracted to, but I don't want to be with a beauty queen.   I couldn't deal with the constant feeling of being inferior.

[obscure]

Had to go with the obscure option.

       

[Orbert]

I also am realistic enough to know that there is no "perfect woman", and waiting for her to come along, or actively seeking her, would be a waste of time.  No woman is going to just happen to satisfy all requirements.  Therefore I decided long ago that the one area I would relax my stupid self-imposed standards is in the area of relationships.  I would "settle".  I cannot expect someone to have the same work ethic as me.  I cannot expect someone to have the same taste in music, food, TV or cinema.  Same political views, same ideas on children and education, etc. 

IMHO, really only the list in the last sentence matters for a relationship. All the other stuff, I would argue that it's actually better if the partner has different views on those things. I'm not interested in dating a clone of mine; I am much more interested in meeting someone who has their own ideas and notions of things.

I mostly agree.  At some point, I just started thinking of issues which might cause problems in relationships, and those came to mind.  I'd still say most of the others have at least some importance, though.  Dating a clone of yourself would be boring, opposites attract, etc., but if you're arguing all the time because you can't agree on who should be doing what, what you want to watch on TV, or where you want to go eat, then the relationship may never get to the point where you're talking marriage and kids.  If you don't literally argue about those other things, that's cool, but you still need to agree, or at least not strongly disagree, most of the time, or you can end up resenting the relationship itself, feeling like you're always compromising.  Sure, real relationships are about compromising, but you don't want to feel like you're always giving and never really getting what you want.  Do you really want to spend your life with someone who you literally have to compromise with on everything?

So anyway, yeah, the last list is probably the biggies, but it all matters, or should at least be considered, depending on whether you're talking about long-term (marriage, etc.) or "just" a relationship.

Also this:

There isn't "leagues"  Love has no boundaries.   When it's right, it's right.

[alirocker08]

I've found that if you go for someone out of your league, they tend to be complete arseholes.

[Orbert]

Alice, that's because you're so awesome that all guys are complete arseholes by comparison.  The tragedy of being in a league of your own.

[lonestar]

Alice, that's because you're so awesome that all guys are complete arseholes by comparison.  The tragedy of being in a league of your own.

Seconded.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

Mrs. Cozmo is totally miles out of my "league", if I were to put it in such terms.  I totally won the lottery.