Return to Sender or Not? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [People] >> Singles



Message

ChoirDJ -> Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 7:27:17 PM)

I know, I know...this is a loaded question so let me set the scenario.

Suppose you become friends with someone online and the more you talk with that person, the more you realize this person has so many of the qualities you are looking for in a spouse. You've never seen this person so you are imagining your ideal person has a full head of hair and looks like a cross between Brad Pitt and Ben Afflect. If you are a guy, your ideal spouse is very well proportioned and could certainly hold her own in a Ms. "fill in the blank" contest. You decide to meet in person and you discover this person to be even more charming face-to-face as online. Except, this person may be of a different race than you idealized or maybe this person has a receding hairline or is completely bald (male) or not as flattering physique as you had hoped for (female).

Do you put a "Great Contents but Wrong Package, Return to Sender" Sticker on him/her or might this person's qualities cause you to look beyond the packaging?



Grace-N-Mercy -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 7:36:51 PM)

First of all, I think it would be a wise idea to exchange pictures before the first meeting. That way, there are no surprises. I can deal with a wide variety of "looks" and personally, I expect someone my age to have a receding hairline and/or at least some baldness... hey, I think these things are sexy. But if a person tells me he has a full head of hair and in fact is bald... bye bye! My ideal spouse will be honest and at least somewhat confident in the way he looks. So there should be no surprises upon the first meeting. A guy's looks are secondary to me to what he is like on the inside. So just be yourself, be confident, and exchange pictures... no surprises!



gaylel1 -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 7:39:59 PM)

I think we as Christians should look beyond the "Total Package." Looks can decive people--for example you might find a person beautiful, but inside they have ugly hearts and an attitude which is not pleasing to God in opposition to someone who is not at attractive, even though the person is trying to improve on their looks who has a good heart.

I think that what we Christians should be doing, unfortnatly, and yes, I've seen it on here over the years and especially some men here rather have that barbie-doll-looks fashion model image instead of a person who has a kind heart and an servants heart.

But I would not have that "return to sender" thing because I judge people from the heart, not superficial interior such as race, etc...



Godhead -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 7:47:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChoirDJ



Except, this person may be of a different race than you idealized or maybe this person has a receding hairline or is completely bald (male) or not as flattering physique as you had hoped for (female).




Well I still have all my hair, I keep it in a shoe box under my bed.

My hairline might be receding, but my back hair isn't. [8D]

I cannot understand why you would say such terribles things as receding hairline unless she had a receding hairline, that might be pushing the envelope. I would take her to a healing meeting and beg the Lord for mercy [8|]

Race on the other hand would never be an issue, why would that matter to anybody?



BugLady -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 7:54:28 PM)

quote:

So just be yourself, be confident, and exchange pictures... no surprises!


Definitely exchange pictures. I think it's good to merely know what people look like. Mainly to put a face to a name, not to determine their attractability. Too much time communicating, when it comes to romance, without knowing what someone looks like is not a good thing, IMHO.



Godhead -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:02:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BugLady

Too much time communicating, when it comes to romance, without knowing what someone looks like is not a good thing, IMHO.


Especially when she is the one doing all the talking [8D]



BugLady -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:06:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Godhead

Especially when she is the one doing all the talking [8D]


If she's the only one doing any talking, then she needs to stop. [;)]



9drtr -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:06:49 PM)

What you do is keep in mind that your fantasies are fantasies. Your date's failure to live up to unrealistic expectations is your problem, not his.



BugLady -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:09:14 PM)

Just adjusting things a bit for gender neutrality.

quote:

Your date's failure to live up to unrealistic expectations is your problem, not his.


Your date's failure to live up to unrealistic expectations is your problem, not hers. [;)]



Grace-N-Mercy -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:16:16 PM)

quote:

If she's the only one doing any talking, then she needs to stop.

[sm=thumbsup.gif]

quote:

What you do is keep in mind that your fantasies are fantasies. Your date's failure to live up to unrealistic expectations is your problem, not his/hers.

[sm=thumbsup.gif]



9drtr -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:17:38 PM)

I'm a dinosaur; I still use the masculine as the inclusive.

We need a dinosaur smiley.



Godhead -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:20:47 PM)

I think that true romance goes beyond words, like there is no words to express you my love [8D]



BugLady -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:30:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 9drtr

I'm a dinosaur; I still use the masculine as the inclusive.

We need a dinosaur smiley.


I think men and women should be treated equally when it comes to this sort of stuff... not to mention other stuff.

I also think people shouldn't develop expectations in the first place.



Godhead -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 8:45:29 PM)

Jurrasic park [8D]



gaylel1 -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 9:10:47 PM)

The only way I would return to sender if that person is walking with the Lord or not.



Godhead -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 9:17:21 PM)

Yes good answer. Lord turn my wanton desire into a desire to serve thee [8|]



ChoirDJ -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 11:00:02 PM)

Some of your responses had me chuckling quite a bit. Of course there would have to be the chemistry but as someone pointed out earlier, if that person is ugly on the inside then it doesn't matter what they look like on the outside.

At what point would you exchange pictures with someone you might be interested in knowing better? Is there a set time frame of dialogue?



Prairiehiker -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 11:10:43 PM)

To be brutally honest, Yeah, I'd say Return to Sender. Looks of the person matters to me. I have to be attracted to the person. I'm not saying that he's got to look like Brad Pitt, but if his physical appearance doesn't appeal to me, no matter how godly the man is, I just don't think anything will develop between us in terms of romantic potentials. I would react the same way to someone who comes in a great package, but is empty inside. I'd send him back, too. I'd have to be attracted to the whole package. I know most of you will think I'm superficial. I know I'm not, so I won't argue.

But I doubt I'd come to the point of meeting a person without knowing what he looks like. I won't even correspond with anyone who doesn't put a picture on their profile (when I used to have an active profile in a dating site). I fear that a person is hiding something (married??) when they don't post a picture, so no matter how great they describe themselves, I'll just ignore them.



KuKu -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 11:14:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChoirDJ

as someone pointed out earlier, if that person is ugly on the inside then it doesn't matter what they look like on the outside.

At what point would you exchange pictures with someone you might be interested in knowing better? Is there a set time frame of dialogue?


just a little emphasis on the first part LOL

Meeting on the internet has an advantage- you base your opinion on someone based on their words, their thoughts, their beliefs, etc.- the IMPORTANT part of who they are- not the superficial. Unless they lied to you about their looks, when you first 'see' them, if your opinion changes, the person with the problem is you- and the problem is misplaced priorities. He/she doesn't cease to be funny, intellegent, Christian, compassionate because they have buck teeth or a bad haircut. Let me ask this- in 20 years they won't look the way they do now (ask people who have married for looks LOL), so why bother majoring on it now? A divorce because he went bald or she got fat is a disaster for all involved... living with 4 children badly harmed by this right now.

I know that people here whom I have met in real life are shorter than they sound[8D], younger than they seem, more shy in person than on the computer, greyer, balder, thinner, cuter, etc. than I thought they were based on MY PROJECTED IMAGE vs REALITY. Not a one of them has lost my friendship because of it. I don't use physical description to determine friendships nor relationships.

Come to think of it I was engaged to a guy with physical results of a bout with polio. He has a fully paralyzed leg and walks with a very strong limp. But he is also a wonderfully sweet, funny, God loving guy. If our ministries ever lined up, I'd still consider him- limp, appreciation for good food[8D], and all.

I'd exchange pictures when we decided to meet, to avoid standing at the airport not knowing who I was looking at LOL- the time frame would depend on the relationship.



gaylel1 -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 11:25:51 PM)

About this race thing--that is a pet peeve with me because I don't think Christians, those who believe in the bible should not reject someone because of their race. It really, to be honest should not be an issue nor physical charatistics. Look, I'm not one of the beautiful people in the world as far as looks is concerned, but at least I do have a heart and a soul, and even though they are far from perfect, one thing that I have and that is Jesus in my heart. And if these people are looking for perfection as far as looks, etc, as they find their future husband/wife, I believe that something is wrong with them and they need to take a reality check.



MyCatSmokey2006 -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/29/2008 11:26:43 PM)

I believe that you need to be careful when you look for online romance. Even if the person sends you their picture, you might want to do further checking, as he or she could very well be a sex offender or other criminal which you probably not want to associate with.

I don't think that people who don't post their picture online always have something to hide. It could very well be that they don't want to be targeted by sex offenders or other people who could hurt them. If they have something to hide, then you might not want to deal with them anyway.

Just my two cents [;)]



LabGuy -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/30/2008 12:31:15 AM)

I would have to say that it's essential that we find our (prospective) mate attractive. But I do not believe that is determined by looks alone.

The Bible makes it clear there are obligations within the marriage covenant - ones that would be difficult or impossible to fulfill if you find your spouse unattractive. To marry someone you simply do not find attractive is to set yourself up for failure and invite sin.

But in all honesty, physical appearance is only one component of that. I believe you will find that if you genuinely care for someone, your standard for beauty/handsomeness is going to be dramatically broader than for a random stranger. And that's because you know the whole person. And if you're attracted to the whole person, the odds are good you still will be when the inevitable happens and their looks change/fade.

Hope that made sense...

-Robb



OneOfHisJewels -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/30/2008 1:04:20 AM)

quote:

I've seen it on here over the years and especially some men here rather have that barbie-doll-looks fashion model image instead of a person who has a kind heart and an servants heart.



I have seen men on here say they want someone attractive TO THEM, and I've seen men describe what is attractive to them, but in all their descriptions and discussions, I actually haven't seen any of the men say they insist on the Barbie doll look...good thing, because I heard at some point that some engineering type people figured out at one point, that if she were a real person, she would topple over and be unable to walk. I also haven't seen any man on crosswalk, even in Men's Only (yeah, I peeked, naughty me[&o]) say looks was their ONLY criteria, or that they would want good looks INSTEAD of a servant's heart. All the men I saw listed good character qualities they desired as well.

I really don't think a man wanting someone attractive to him is that big of a deal, because once boys get out of their jr. high and high school immaturity, and aren't so influenced by peer pressure, there comes a point when there are as many different opinions of who is attractive and who is not, as there are men.

Ask yourself, this Gayle. Would you rather have a husband who could honestly tell you every day how pretty you are to him, or a husband who you knew wasn't attracted to you, and was merely tolerating you? If you and your spouse aren't attracted to each other, would it really be good for your physical relationship?

I have had some men tell me they greatly prefer redheads, and I've had some men who don't prefer that themselves tell me they have friends who do. Other men, however prefer blondes, others brunettes, others black women, others hispanic women, etc, etc. Now as a redhead myself should I sit around sulking about all the men who prefer the other hair colors/races? No, of course not. I want one of them men who prefers redheads
(and there are plenty that do), because I want to be reassured on a daily basis that he finds me attractive.



ChoirDJ -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/30/2008 1:09:04 AM)

Seems like most would say there has to be decency in the physical appearance to not put the "Return to Sender" sticker on him or her (lol). Just because of all the issues going on with identity theft. Regarding pictures being posted, I would probably be more inclined to send a few photos upon request and not necessarily post a picture that anyone and everyone could see. Another issue to consider about posting pictures is that we share some very personal things on here (that I would only share with a very select few in person). I would be a little concerned about lets say a coworker recognizing me and sharing some of the details of what I share here but this is a whole other topic altogether. I would want to swap pictures very early in the game though if I came across someone I might be interested in getting to know better.



OneOfHisJewels -> RE: Return to Sender or Not? (6/30/2008 1:17:58 AM)

quote:

The only way I would return to sender if that person is walking with the Lord or not.


What about poor personal hygiene? What if you had nothing in common? You like music, don't you? What if he thinks music is stupid? What if you enjoy traveling, and he never wants to leave the neighborhood? I think there are a few more factors that come into play besides just Godliness, although Godliness IS the most important.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI