While waiting for my work life to stand still for the evening, I had a great on-line chat with my former flame who I will call Mr. Nomad, who is safely snuggled up somewhere in Miami. We are going to be friends and no more benefits...mostly cause I want to do this whole Mr. S (old flame I am thinking about dating again) thing right.
We deserve that, right? Duh.
Jolene's recent post about dealbreakers and living one's life got me to thinking...
Well here's my thought process. I've worked out dealbreakers in therapy. The biggies and the little one's and the one's that I created just to protect myself from any pain or anxiety. Preventative measures like height or someones religious/political views that of course can break some couples but in reality aren't that big a deal to most. Things that were never huge stressors in my childhood and certainly not for my parents who are on opposite spectrum of those worlds and survived several White House changes. I've alienated Men in my life to based on Fear. I know, I know we've gone there before and it's been done. Blah, blah, blah. But here's where I'm going with this one. Dealbreakers...are they real?
Not that I don't agree with my homegirl Jolene and her need to be able to live her own life away from her Man. I think that is justifiable and totally necessary. It's a matter of healthy life choices for one's own sanity. However I have begun to wonder if these alleged dealbreakers are really truth or some manifested protection front that prevents us from really seeing a connection.
He's too short. He doesn't work out. He's not into the same music I am. He lives an hour away. He's a little chubby. He isn't a dog person. He doesn't want to get married right now. He's not into car sex. I could go on...and on and on.
We've all got them. Nomad has his own. This isn't a gender thing by any means. I'm starting to think it's something we do once we've been hurt or injured by a particular type of person with those traits and an attempt to weed out the bad apples from the alleged good ones. Stick with me here, it's kind of early. For example, Nomad will not date girls in a particular work related field because he feels they are too staunch and don't understand his need for exploration. Nor will he date women who need a pet, like R&B or have no desire to not partake in some form of exhibitionism. He's a doll and I heart him. But most of his dealbreakers make no sense to me. They all relate to some past heartbreak and a single person, not overall genre of woman in general.
Further thinking about this whole dealbreaker concept I thought about a few of my BFF's and how they are looking for a man who looks a certain way, and if said prospect does not then he doesn't get the time of day. And I've gotten to know a few of their castoff's and find that most of them are what they are looking for in a partner but because he's not a Jock with giant arms and the height to match, poor guy doesn't get the time of day post-first date. Does that make sense? And they even admit these guys are awesome...he just doesn't fit into the looks category they have created. I know, I know that whole Chemistry thing people freak out about...I will get there. Hold your panties.
So, this then prompted my look at my own dealbreakers...and I got stuck. My dealbreakers seem pretty generic and have nothing to do with the person specifically, but the type of relationship I am looking to have with someone. My only big one relating to the person...? No one with any kind of relationship with any kind of Program...you know what I mean. That's the only one I've got I think. Every thing else revolves around being with someone who respects me, loves me and adores me for who I am.
For some reason I always go back to my parents, they are dealbreaker central if you really examine their initial wants/needs prior to meeting each other. My Dad was a hippy, with long hair, mustache and no desire to 'settle down' and my Mom was(is) a Mexican Catholic Princess looking for a strong committed tall blonde Manly Man to make her toes curl. Neither matched each others desires and here we are 30-some odd years later and they are still going strong.
What does it mean??
My therapist has an awesome take on it and now I don't disagree. Over time we create a series of attributes that appear to fit into our big picture. As we experience hurt or disappointment we begin to weed out those key attributes that relate to the pain and we call them dealbreakers to justify the reason why we don't want that to happen again. Therefore closing ourselves off to a person who might like/act/do something similar but could be a viable prospect.
While I tend to agree with most of that I do think that some of those dealbreakers are needed...like living your own life and being your own person. I couldn't bare to be with someone who needed me for everything. And I couldn't be with someone who didn't like kids.Those are kind of key to my life.
As for the Chemistry (physical stuff) she thinks that many people in general create a picture of what they think attracts them and this is what they stick to in order to fulfill that fantasy or desire that ultimately keeps them from discovering what they are truly seeking in a mate. In terms of woman she feels many look for a strong and handsome man to provide for them (even if they claim a desire for independence), but I think we know that looks doesn't mean he's going to bring home the bacon (case in point, the Bio aka Baby Daddy).
Honestly, I think it's important to know who you are before you decide who you want. Maybe I won't call them dealbreakers anymore...it just sounds so final. Let's call them Guidelines to Date By? Eh, it's a work in progress....just like me for that matter. And right now I'm not sure how I feel about the whole idea of dealbreaking and dealmaking...