I’m in a relationship, fwiw, and all the “ideal” characteristics are actually there.
1: What traits are most important to you in a prospective partner?
Trustworthiness, intelligence, accomplishment, depth, a happy and adventurous outlook, “chemistry” between us. I’m usually drawn in first by interesting ideas plus confidence (and all the usual primate stuff).
2: What kind of role would you want your partner(s) to play in your life?
A boyfriend. Love, friendship, sex, someone to learn from, making each other stronger.
3: How much time would you spend together, ideally?
See each other every day if it was practical.
4: How important is it to you that you share similar tastes?
Some things are more important than others. I couldn’t care less about your taste in music, movies, or food. I do get along much better with people who like and understand science. Also, people who read for pleasure, especially literature and science fiction. It’s important to share a “taste” for rational thinking. Exercise is a major thing to have in common (extra credit if free weights are involved.)
5: How important is it that you be ideologically similar?
Atheist is preferable. I wouldn’t date an observant Christian. Politics aren’t super-important except so far as they reflect values. And shared values are rare, and pretty amazing when you can find them. I’m an individualist and humanist; I believe in self-actualization, personal independence, tolerance, and making human beings better off. Very few people really get that.
6: What, if anything, are your dealbreakers?
Honestly, that’s the wrong question. You probably wouldn’t date anybody who didn’t have one dealbreaker trait. (Anyone except dishonest people or abusers? That doesn’t narrow the population much.) Instead, I’ve got a heuristic: you should be winning at life more than me. Or at least the same.
You probably wouldn’t date anybody who didn’t have one dealbreaker trait.
Either I’m misunderstanding something here or you are. A dealbreaker is something that you cannot accept. If it’s there, the deal’s off, no other questions necessary. You absolutely wouldn’t date anybody who had one dealbreaker trait, otherwise it’s not a dealbreaker.
I’m in a relationship, fwiw, and all the “ideal” characteristics are actually there.
Trustworthiness, intelligence, accomplishment, depth, a happy and adventurous outlook, “chemistry” between us. I’m usually drawn in first by interesting ideas plus confidence (and all the usual primate stuff).
A boyfriend. Love, friendship, sex, someone to learn from, making each other stronger.
See each other every day if it was practical.
Some things are more important than others. I couldn’t care less about your taste in music, movies, or food. I do get along much better with people who like and understand science. Also, people who read for pleasure, especially literature and science fiction. It’s important to share a “taste” for rational thinking. Exercise is a major thing to have in common (extra credit if free weights are involved.)
Atheist is preferable. I wouldn’t date an observant Christian. Politics aren’t super-important except so far as they reflect values. And shared values are rare, and pretty amazing when you can find them. I’m an individualist and humanist; I believe in self-actualization, personal independence, tolerance, and making human beings better off. Very few people really get that.
Honestly, that’s the wrong question. You probably wouldn’t date anybody who didn’t have one dealbreaker trait. (Anyone except dishonest people or abusers? That doesn’t narrow the population much.) Instead, I’ve got a heuristic: you should be winning at life more than me. Or at least the same.
Either I’m misunderstanding something here or you are. A dealbreaker is something that you cannot accept. If it’s there, the deal’s off, no other questions necessary. You absolutely wouldn’t date anybody who had one dealbreaker trait, otherwise it’s not a dealbreaker.