Deal Breakers?

[Tamara224]

No way Tams...I've actually noticed the same thing, but...I thought it was just me!

Yay for corroboration!!

 

[Blank123]

I never insulted all christian women. You simply continue to falsely accuse me of having done so.

you did agree that you were generalising women, no?

So now my posts were offensive?

A woman can call me bitter and irrational, and refuse to answer the question, and then its my fault?

you're deflecting again. You know why people are saying those things about you. You just aren't acknowledging that in favour of blaming the women here for being offended by things *you* said.

You are the one deflecting from the issue. Hey, you spend the whole time finding fault with me, when my original post was not in any way directed at you.

which would probably make me more impartial here. I'm not part of that original conversation but i can tell you why the women here are reacting the way they are. you can choose to take what i say as a personal attack or choose to take as an eye-opening and growing experience about how what you say actually comes across to people.

I never attacked anyone.

Thats how you were coming across. What you may or may not have intended in your posts, I don't know, and I'm not attempting to judge.

I was however called "bitter" and "irrational" for no apparant reason.

you're deflecting again. you know why people were saying those things. you just need to own up to that.

Why should I apologize,

because, whether you meant to or not, you have offended people here.

when I DID NOT attack anyone, and definitely not directly.

you definitely did not directly attack anyone? does that mean you indirectly attacked someone?

In the original post, I even told by dluvs2trvl in post 93 not to take it personally, that I was addressing her statement and the issue i laid out, and not her specifically.

and then proceeded to generalise Christian women in a less than flattering manner. Even qualifying that statement with "don't take it personally" doesn't free you from taking responsibility when you actually do insult people.

I mean goodness, the only reason I'm upset now is because you three threw a fit and continue to find fault with me and for the most part, refuse to address the issue.

trust me, i'm not trying to find fault with you. I'm just trying to explain to you why people were offended by what you said.

I'm not going to apologize for something I never did, nor intended to do. I already explained the part about that "generalization," and none of you would listen or be satisfied anyway.

thats because you didn't seem to see a problem with what you said.

Once again, all I did was ask a question. Do you prefer I back up and delete everything except the questions themselves?

nope. I'd prefer if you could apologise to the women here for your comments which you know were offensive. Then perhaps if you can rephrase your question in a manner that is not offensive you'll get an answer Not a lot to ask for I don't think.

I basically already did that when I reposted it though, and you still don't want an honest discussion, but insist on me apologizing when I didn't do anything wrong, and whatever wrong you think I did, I already addressed that too.

where? All i've seen is a lot af attempts to justify yourself when you know how you're coming across and attempts to deflect from the issue as to why people were offended by placing the blame on those who were offended.

If you are that offended by what basically amounts to an oversight or a phrase that wasn't qualified on an internet thread posted in real time,w ell then I don't know what to say.

Actually to be honest, I wasn't really that offended. I've got a thick skin and i've heard a lot worse comments than that thrown against women. Like I said, I'm just attempting to show you how you're coming across.

I tried to explain what I was intending to convey, but it didn't appease any of you

Again where? If you have explained this without any more generalisations against women, attempting to deflect to avoid having to take responsibility for your words by placing the blame on those who were offended then please repost it because it must've gotten lost somewhere here. I haven't seen that post.

so I'm likely just going to quit bothering unless some of you decide you'd like to talk instead of just "folding your arms".

I actually am trying to talk with you, but if you want to stop talking thats fine. totally up to you

 

[JesusIsTheOnlyWay]

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but can I ask you a whole bunch of questions.

After God gave you dominion over the Earth in Genesis Chapter, don't you think he wants you to take control of your life, and make a life you want for yourself.

Since you're on the singles board, it probably means you're single, so that means you can make decisions to embark on finding what is best for you without it affecting a wife and children.

So, here's the questions.

1,) What do you want?

The reason I ask this question is God never told the person with 5 talents, or 2 talents to go out and invest those talents to make more - but they did anyways.

Are you sure you want to be the person who had a single talent and hid it away.

Friend, I know I am not the person with a single talent who hid it anyway. Maybe I'm a person who had more than one talent and forgot a few along the way or something, but I know that I have dedicated my life to God, and aside from some backslidings and mis-steps,some worse than others, I have "fought a good fight".


That parable was actually more about the keeping of God's commandments, and preaching the Word of God than "normal" day to day activities, but it does apply to everything to some extent, you are right.

I have "invested" talents in the form of my time and often money in ministry and even on many Christian chat boards. In fact, I am not saying this to brag, but just to make the point, as far as I can tell, in the past 6 months I have literally donated more of my "talents," at least in the form of money, than I have spent on myself.

I preach sometimes early on sunday. When Im not banned or censored, I spend most of my spare time discussing the Bible on the internet, especially as I try to consecrate myself more and more to the Lord and get away from my past.


You want to know about my "talents," well, I do not wish to brag, but if you seriously want me to identify myself to you, I will try.

Regarding "spiritual gifts" and "talents" of that nature, I have been born again since a very early age and have been baptized with the Holy Spirit for about half my life. I have always tried to live a Christian life and try to minister to other people and "contend for the faith". There are times when I have failed, and failed badly. But I cannot honestly say that I have "hidden" my talents, certainly not all of them, and not for long at that.

Let me speak plainly in that this parable is one that terrifies the hell out of me sometimes, and at times I have been driven to preach in person, or wake up in the middle of the night to write a letter to a pastor who I believe was abusing his authority, or jump on an internet forum and oppose a false doctrine or whatever, and bring scripture and Christ Crucified. I am called to a very high calling, and "woe unto me if I preach not the Gospel," is to me a passage that may very well describe my life. If I am not preaching or at least communicating about Jesus, I find that I can very quickly begin to backslide.

As for natural talents, like intelligence and things, this is a problem for me and a snare for me. I am "good" at a lot of things, so many things in fact that one distracts from the other, and I lose interest in things. Or else I'll be thinking about ten different things that are completely unrelated.

I have an I.Q. of somewhere near 145 and have always tested in the 99 or 100 percentile on every standardized test I've ever taken, going back to third grade.

At this point, most things scientific or mathematical either bore me to tears or else will absorb me into almost another reality. There is often little or no middle ground, though I wish there was. Someone can call out an arithmetic or algebra question and I often have the answer spurted out literally with no conscious thought whatsoever. In fact, if I'm "distracted" when they ask, the answer will come even faster. At times I have actually used a calculator just to make myself appear normal in this. However, this never seemed to translate well to higher math, as my college level calculus classes took me two attempts each to pass.

I sometimes get ideas for inventions or problem solving techniques in fields that I have no real experience whatsoever, and yet learn 6 months or a year later that such a device has just been invented, etc.



What do I want?

I really don't have much answers to that other than these

-I want to see as many people saved as possible.
Don't know how this helps, because most people, especially church people, don't want to hear "what does the Bible say about that". Churches and christian web sites often don't want me on their staff, or even in attendance, because the first thing I'm going to preach against is the abuses of the "senior pastor".

-I want a wife and to love her with all of my being, second only to God himself.
I don't want to be single even one more day, much less a significant period of time. I have examined this in prayer countless hours in my life, and I want real love and believe this to be of the Lord. I don't want anything less than real love, and the "lust" aspect must not be a part of it. Let God put anything ungodly to death. I want no part of it. I want my life to mean something and be of deep value and personal blessing to someone other than just God and me.

-I want kids. at least one, maybe two or more.

-As for the rest of it, I honest to God don't know, with very few exceptions, and never have.

The last time I actually felt like I did was at least 10 years ago when I was in JROTC in high school. I was very good at this, and got my name on a plaque for certain very unique awards, which is still there.

I was going to join the marine corps, but when they withdrew their scholarship offer, I withdrew my decision to join. Which is just as well, I think. In hindsight, I can't actually see myself shooting at someone else, or designing bombs or tracking devices for bombs, etc.

Even then, if you asked me what I wanted to do with my life, I had no answer, and again, other than the three things I've listed above, I have no answer to this day.

I am very much "function" oriented. If something has no function as it regards me, then I don't very well relate to it. I drive across town to pick up my contact lenses, and nothing that I pass as far as businesses and etc, holds any more interest to me than the grass in the median on the interstate. If someone looks like they need help and can't handle it themself, I have stopped to help, but other than that, it is all vanity to me.

2.) Who are you?

God does give you that answer, but you seem to have forgotten.

You don't have to answer these questions here, but you really need to answer them for yourself in your heart.

I don't think "forgotten" is exactly right. depending on exactly what you mean by the question, I honestly don't necessarily think I've ever known. Well, these questions do tie together I guess, so its hard to think about one without the other.

You may not believe that, but I pray about these two questions very, very much.

I mean yeah, sure, there's lots of things that interested me all my life, and things that I was good at, but none of them has EVER actually stood out to me as "something I want to do for the rest of my life." Nothing does, really. This in spite of me spending a significant portion of my personal prayer life on this and related things. Um, and I sometimes pray for hours on end, and try to examine this from every imaginable angle.

I distinctly remember having no clue on career days in high school. I also distinctly remember going to college having no clue in the world why I was really going, and basically just picked something to try and major in, and changed a few times when that didn't work out, which is part of the reason I eventually quit (then it took the next 4 years to pay off student loans):

1 part, no clue why I was there in the first place.
1 part, sick and tired of hearing how there was no God and I'm a monkey.
1 part, loss of whatever interest I did have in the first place, and accompanying laziness, or apathy, or idolatry, whatever it was.

So basically, for the last ten years, my life has consisted of either unemployment or odd jobs that I have no real interest in whatsoever, and only apply to because I'm "supposed to work," and because I do recognize that it is likely impossible to meet someone who would ever consider marriage to a guy who doesn't have "something" for a job.

Again, if you ask me what I'm good at, or interested in, I can list several things. But if you ask me what I might actually "enjoy" doing for an extended period of time, and on someone else's schedule, not much, if anything.


Hey, thanks for at least trying to help.

I have been as honest as I know, I mean this isn't everything obviously, but seriously, about the only thing else that I've ever actually wanted to do is preach, but like I said, the churches and other christian organizations I've ever joined verifiably don't want me around, even when they say otherwise. Well, they want me around as long as I pay "tithe and offering" and then sit down and shut up. They verifiably don't want me around if I open a Bible and start talking about what it really says. How do I know? Because they always ban or censor me, or ask me to leave, or give some other indication that I should shut up and etc.

Again, thanks for trying to help. But I'm not joking, I have examined all these things for years and years, and prayed them to oblivion.

God Bless.

 

[JesusIsTheOnlyWay]

I didn't "spit in your face". I thought I was perfectly respectful and civil in what I said. You've admitted that you're bitter. Yet you're unleashing all your venom on me, because I'm a convenient female tartget.

This is why I said I don't think you can have a rational discussion about it. You've just proven that you can't.

I'm not saying "don't speak to me". I'm happy to talk to you anytime you like, as long as you can be nice about it.

Well, I am not unleashing any venom on you. You in fact unleashed venom on me. Check the post log.

I didn't even address you originally, and the first thing you did in response to my post was sign on and call me bitter and irrational.

If I called you some derrogatory comments or whatever, then you'd have reason to be mad at me, but I've done you no wrong.

You've proven that you cannot have a rational discussion, because you refuse to address my question and simply keep getting hung up on ONE sentence that I could go back and delete, and it would have no bearing on anything, which I pointed out repeatedly.

You are not a "convenient female target" and I don't know why in God's creation you cannot conceive of me as doing anything other than attacking you. I haven't attacked you at all.

If you think I have attacked you, or anyone, then you are simply reading something into my posts which ABSOLUTELY IS NOT THERE.

I'm sick of defending myself against attacks when I did nothing to deserve it.

 

[sweetlambofgod]

wow I could make a huge list, but um if they dont have a relationship with Jesus, if they smoke, drink, do drugs, curse, lie are all huge ones for me

 

[JesusIsTheOnlyWay]

you did agree that you were generalising women, no?

you're deflecting again. You know why people are saying those things about you. You just aren't acknowledging that in favour of blaming the women here for being offended by things *you* said.

which would probably make me more impartial here. I'm not part of that original conversation but i can tell you why the women here are reacting the way they are. you can choose to take what i say as a personal attack or choose to take as an eye-opening and growing experience about how what you say actually comes across to people.

Thats how you were coming across. What you may or may not have intended in your posts, I don't know, and I'm not attempting to judge.

you're deflecting again. you know why people were saying those things. you just need to own up to that.

because, whether you meant to or not, you have offended people here.

you definitely did not directly attack anyone? does that mean you indirectly attacked someone?

and then proceeded to generalise Christian women in a less than flattering manner. Even qualifying that statement with "don't take it personally" doesn't free you from taking responsibility when you actually do insult people.

trust me, i'm not trying to find fault with you. I'm just trying to explain to you why people were offended by what you said.

thats because you didn't seem to see a problem with what you said.

nope. I'd prefer if you could apologise to the women here for your comments which you know were offensive. Then perhaps if you can rephrase your question in a manner that is not offensive you'll get an answer Not a lot to ask for I don't think.

where? All i've seen is a lot af attempts to justify yourself when you know how you're coming across and attempts to deflect from the issue as to why people were offended by placing the blame on those who were offended.

Actually to be honest, I wasn't really that offended. I've got a thick skin and i've heard a lot worse comments than that thrown against women. Like I said, I'm just attempting to show you how you're coming across.

Again where? If you have explained this without any more generalisations against women, attempting to deflect to avoid having to take responsibility for your words by placing the blame on those who were offended then please repost it because it must've gotten lost somewhere here. I haven't seen that post.

I actually am trying to talk with you, but if you want to stop talking thats fine. totally up to you

Look since you clearly continue to find fault with me over one generalization, which apparantly none of you understand what I was saying anyway, In spite of me having stated several times what I meant, I don't know what you expect me to say.


By the way, Jesus used LOTS of generalizations in the Bible. So if you ladies find fault with me for using generalizations, and to the point that you refuse to address my questions for real, as you all have, well, the fault is really with you.

Like I said, Jesus used a very high number of generalizations in the Bible, especially when dealing with certain religious or political groups. I can quote them to you if you like.

For example, apparantly, all scribes and pharisees are hypocrites(Matt. 23,) hidden graves, fools and blind.

Generalization.

====

Its ridiculous that the three of you wont even address a simple question over a generalization.

I submit that you ladies are simply using my generalization, as an excuse to ignore the other portions of the original post I made, along with subsequent posts, because You know I was right.


Are you offended? Or are you convicted?

 

[Blank123]

By the way, Jesus used LOTS of generalizations in the Bible. So if you ladies find fault with me for using generalizations, and to the point that you refuse to address my questions for real, as you all have, well, the fault is really with you.

Like I said, Jesus used a very high number of generalizations in the Bible, especially when dealing with certain religious or political groups. I can quote them to you if you like.

For example, apparantly, all scribes and pharisees are hypocrites(Matt. 23,) hidden graves, fools and blind.

Generalization.

that is a a logical fallacy known as a red herring

I submit that you ladies are simply using my generalization, as an excuse to ignore the other portions of the original post I made, along with subsequent posts, because You know I was right.

and that is a logical fallacy known as Begging the Question

Are you offended? Or are you convicted?

read my post again for your answer

 

[intricatic]

Well, "stay at home women's" are a deal breaker for me.


But seriously, answer the question. Why should I take any of the "guy" jobs around here when the income barely pays the expense to get back to work the next day? But a woman can make 2-4 times as much money in less time?

Is there something wrong with the question?

So if I say its pointless for a guy to work if a woman can make, say, $50,000-100,000 per year easier than he can make $30,000, you find that as a bad attitude?

But the typical christian woman expects the man to live at work and visit home. Do you find nothing wrong with that?

If it was the other way around, if the guy made $50k - $100k, which I don't know very many around here who do, but if this was the case, you'd probably find nothing wrong with his wife staying at home. Like I said, most people don't. Heck, I wouldn't necessarily either if she isn't blowing it like so many do.

But if the tables are turned, the woman thinks something's wrong with the guy?

That's why I said it was hypocritical, and at least for the moment, I stand by my assessment unless and until you or someone else can give me a good reason to think otherwise.

Irrational, and illogical. Stereotypes are good when they're not skewed, and instead treated as probabilities rather than facts. There are no facts within a stereotype, just a specific statement about a general observation. Your general observation may be skewed by some prejudgment you have formed which inhibits your ability to see the topic clearly. When people get offended that you have made such a generalization, it tends to be indicative of a skewed or distorted perspective.

 

[bradmatic]

wow I could make a huge list, but um if they dont have a relationship with Jesus, if they smoke, drink, do drugs, curse, lie are all huge ones for me

ditto.. if i can't check those off the list.. they don't stand a chance!

 

[sweetlambofgod]

ditto.. if i can't check those off the list.. they don't stand a chance!

exactly!

 

[JesusIsTheOnlyWay]

Irrational, and illogical. Stereotypes are good when they're not skewed, and instead treated as probabilities rather than facts. There are no facts within a stereotype, just a specific statement about a general observation. Your general observation may be skewed by some prejudgment you have formed which inhibits your ability to see the topic clearly. When people get offended that you have made such a generalization, it tends to be indicative of a skewed or distorted perspective.

It isn't even about the generalization itself. I even said that was just one word that could have been anything else and was never intended to mean that all women sit around watching soap operas.

I already addressed that like two pages ago, but those three simply will not get past that and address the only reason I posted the second time on this thread in the first place.

I responded to a female's post with this basic point.

She found fault with a guy who either didn't have a job or wasn't in school, I forget the exact words she used, but she said something like, "he wants me to support him".

Why should it be any different than a "stay at home wife"?

The female poster found fault with a guy who doesn't have it all together, but would she do the same to a stay at home wife?

Those are the questions I was asking, though not necessarily worded the same, in bold in case anyone is having trouble understanding english.

Then I get a torrent of posts by three ladies, two of which spent their first several posts accusing me of being bitter and irrational, all the while refusing to answer the questions, which apparantly they either do not understand, or else just plain refuse to answer for no good or relevant reason.

 

[intricatic]

It isn't even about the generalization itself. I even said that was just one word that could have been anything else and was never intended to mean that all women sit around watching soap operas.

I already addressed that like two pages ago, but those three simply will not get past that and address the only reason I posted the second time on this thread in the first place.

I responded to a female's post with this basic point.

She found fault with a guy who either didn't have a job or wasn't in school, I forget the exact words she used, but she said something like, "he wants me to support him".

Why should it be any different than a "stay at home wife"?

The female poster found fault with a guy who doesn't have it all together, but would she do the same to a stay at home wife?

Those are the questions I was asking, in bold in case anyone is having trouble understanding english.

Then I get a torrent of posts by three ladies, two of which spent their first several posts accusing me of being bitter and irrational, all the while refusing to answer the questions, which apparantly they either do not understand, or else just plain refuse to answer for no good or relevant reason.

The idea revolves around the concept of a housewife, which is a maternal role, and one that is fostered also in scripture. The man should most certainly be working; this idea of egalitarianism and jealousy/envy is just as much vice as any "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" scenario. The problem in logic seems to come from the assumption that women are likewise universally apt to work, and therefore should pull an even, if not greater share, given that women have a (generalized) disproportionate expectation for men to pull all the financial weight.

If a woman says that this is her expectation in a man, and you disagree and say that you know women who make 3x more than most men, you are claiming by probabilistic reason that the opponent in the discussion is incorrect. Probability does not determine valid and invalid argument, it only supports the possibility of validity. If a woman presents her expectation of men, it's only a factor of probability that she makes 3x more than most men do, or that the hypothetical scenario of a stay-at-home mother makes 3x more than men do (or would have some desire to do so - maybe she would rather raise children, homeschool, or some other activity that is unpaid but retains a significant value). Furthermore, what right do you have to judge the expectations of your peers in such an unbalanced way?

 

[EazyMack]

I can get quite finicky when it comes to what kinds of music she listens to or what kinds of TV shows/movies she watches. However, these things kind of fall in line with "Christian standards." Basically, since my goal when entering a relationship is to get married, I don't want a wife who listens to sexually explicit (or even suggestive) music, or watches things that are not family-friendly, or gossipy, etc.

I'm not sure if I have anything quirkier than that to contribute. I'm pretty easy-going otherwise.

 

[intricatic]

My only requisite is that she be able to identify logical fallacies in argumentation. It's more fun that way.

Okay, maybe not the only one, but that's on the list somewhere... I don't remember where I put that dratted list, though.

 

[sweetlambofgod]

I can get quite finicky when it comes to what kinds of music she listens to or what kinds of TV shows/movies she watches. However, these things kind of fall in line with "Christian standards." Basically, since my goal when entering a relationship is to get married, I don't want a wife who listens to sexually explicit (or even suggestive) music, or watches things that are not family-friendly, or gossipy, etc.

I'm not sure if I have anything quirkier than that to contribute. I'm pretty easy-going otherwise.

so Desperate Housewives and Gossip Girl are out?

 

[Inkachu]

It isn't even about the generalization itself. I even said that was just one word that could have been anything else and was never intended to mean that all women sit around watching soap operas.

I already addressed that like two pages ago, but those three simply will not get past that and address the only reason I posted the second time on this thread in the first place.

I responded to a female's post with this basic point.

She found fault with a guy who either didn't have a job or wasn't in school, I forget the exact words she used, but she said something like, "he wants me to support him".

Why should it be any different than a "stay at home wife"?

The female poster found fault with a guy who doesn't have it all together, but would she do the same to a stay at home wife?

Those are the questions I was asking, though not necessarily worded the same, in bold in case anyone is having trouble understanding english.

Then I get a torrent of posts by three ladies, two of which spent their first several posts accusing me of being bitter and irrational, all the while refusing to answer the questions, which apparantly they either do not understand, or else just plain refuse to answer for no good or relevant reason.

I didn't give you a "torrent" of posts. Your posts tend to be about 8-10 paragraphs apiece, in contrast. My posts are usually relatively brief. I'm sure it may have felt like a torrent, though.

I also didn't spend several posts accusing you of anything. I gave my personal opinion, based on what I'd read from you. If you disagree with it, that's fine.

The only question I've seen you repeat is "what was offensive/irrational in my post". Since I didn't say your post was irrational, I can't answer that question. I said I didn't believe you could hold a rational discussion on the topic; not that anything you'd said was irrational.

I've also said that my PM's are open to you and I'm completely willing to talk to you about anything you like.

 

[KarrieTex]

OK, I just went through the first page and I have to wonder if these are serious do's and don'ts.

There is only one requirement for the man I will date and that he loves the Lord with all of his heart.

All this other stuff.... smoking, no sports, no this, and not standing on their head and whistling dixie is not important.

I was foolish in that thought pattern when I was in my 20's. As you get older and you go through more relationships you come to realize a lot of issues such as abuse, honesty and so forth all come under the umbrella....he loves the Lord with all of his heart.

 

[KarrieTex]

It isn't even about the generalization itself. I even said that was just one word that could have been anything else and was never intended to mean that all women sit around watching soap operas.

I already addressed that like two pages ago, but those three simply will not get past that and address the only reason I posted the second time on this thread in the first place.

I responded to a female's post with this basic point.

She found fault with a guy who either didn't have a job or wasn't in school, I forget the exact words she used, but she said something like, "he wants me to support him".

Why should it be any different than a "stay at home wife"?

The female poster found fault with a guy who doesn't have it all together, but would she do the same to a stay at home wife?

Those are the questions I was asking, though not necessarily worded the same, in bold in case anyone is having trouble understanding english.

Then I get a torrent of posts by three ladies, two of which spent their first several posts accusing me of being bitter and irrational, all the while refusing to answer the questions, which apparantly they either do not understand, or else just plain refuse to answer for no good or relevant reason.

YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!!!!

Normally, a SAHW is a mom who has more than enough to deal with. Let me add that there are many SAHH who are great and happy taking care of the house and kiddos.

From what I assumed this was applicable to the situation before children.

Sexism is something that is unattractive...you should look into that.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

My only requisite is that she be able to identify logical fallacies in argumentation. It's more fun that way.

Okay, maybe not the only one, but that's on the list somewhere... I don't remember where I put that dratted list, though.

that is a a logical fallacy known as a red herring

I submit that you ladies are simply using my generalization, as an excuse to ignore the other portions of the original post I made, along with subsequent posts, because You know I was right.

and that is a logical fallacy known as Begging the Question

I think you've found the right girl then.

 

[Im_A]

Why are people arguing over what dealbreakers are for certain people? [rolls eyes]