What is the Difference Between "Standards" and "Shallowness"?

[Subhumanoidal]

Great point about how politeness and consideration make a world of difference.

This example is a little different, but it's one I've come to use quite often (because unfortunately, we see this a lot here.)

Throughout the years, we've had a lot of SAP's (Self-Appointed Prophets/Preachers,) and they usually all say, "I only tell the TRUTH, and if anyone has a PROBLEM with that, they need to take it up with GOD, not me, because I'm only the MESSINGER."

Perhaps, but God gives His messengers a responsibility in how they communicate with His people. Sure, there's times for fire and brimstone. But many times, basic manners would make it a lot easier for people to vibe with the message.

Let's say your beloved mother was in the hospital and passed away.

Doctor #1 comes out, glances as his watch and says, "Wow, she was pretty stubborn in all this, but yup, she finally moved on to heaven, so you should be rejoicing! And thank goodness it was just in time -- I was worried I'd have to postpone my family vacation!"

In contrast, Doctor #2 comes out, takes your hand, looks you in the eye, and says, "I'm so sorry, we did everything we could, but she's moved on to heaven. We all know she's with Jesus, but those of us left behind still grieve. Please know that my staff and I are here if you need to call us with any further questions and concerns."

BOTH doctors told the truth. But which one would most people gravitate to?

No matter what the topic may be (like letting someone know they're not interested in you,) it seems like many people take Doctor #1's approach, but think it's the OTHER person's problems for not being able to accept THE TRUTH. And yet, if it was someone letting them down or giving them bad news, they want to be coddled and have everyone treat them as gently as Doctor #2.

There's a big difference between telling someone, "I don't date fat people" and, "I'm signed up for some advanced classes at my gym, and I'm really hoping to find someone to train with."

It doesn't necessarily make the rejection all that much easier, but it sure does seem like a more considerate approach.

Let's not forget it's also feasible to not give a reason. There's no real obligation to tell people why, under most circumstances.

 

[Soyeong]

Hey Everyone,

I was thinking about some issues that have come up in the threads about what singles want in a potential spouse.

I was also thinking of my grandparents, who were married for 64 years (until her death,) and how much different things were then. They knew each other all their lives, as they had grown up together in a one-room school on a farm. They married not because they each met a long list of the other's standards, though I'm sure there were some, but basically, he was a young man, she was a young woman -- they knew each other and each other's families, and liked each other, and so they got married. (My Grandma did have one stipulation, however -- she wouldn't marry my Grandpa until SHE had a certain amount of money in the bank that SHE had earned herself, which was very unusual in those days.)

Fast forward to modern times, and singles today have lists of "requirements" ranging from height to salary to body weight, hair, and eye color that would give all the wish lists given to Santa combined a run for their money.

When does the concept of "having standards" cross over into "being shallow"?

Here's a good example: as most know, I was adopted from Korea and grew up in a small white town with white parents. As a Christian single myself, I have often known guys or have seen profiles in which it says they are NOT attracted to Asian girls AT ALL.

Is this a standard, or is it shallow?

Modern culture has taught me that my knee-jerk reaction is to automatically shout, "RACIST!!!" and go on a loud, raging tyrant about how I should be seen as "EQUAL," but in my heart, I have to talk to God about the fact that maybe some people weren't built to be attracted to Asians. I'm certainly not saying this is absolute, I'm just saying it's something I have to consider.

As I talked to people over time, I also had to consider things like the white guy who grew with two adopted Asian sisters, and he said he wasn't attracted to Asians because it was impossible for him to look at Asian women as anything else but a sister. I have also heard of people who aren't attracted to certain characteristics because they were abused by someone who fit them in the past.

And considering that the most discriminating of all seems to be Asian culture itself (Koreans are expected to marry traditional Koreans with "good" family histories -- adopted Koreans like myself are NOT "real" Koreans, and, in the most extreme cases, not even real people because we have no "roots" -- recorded family history, and therefore, would bring "bad blood" into another family.) There ARE exceptions of course, and this forum has actually blessed me with an amazing traditional Korean friend whom I am VERY thankful for, as his friendship and God's blessing helped close up many of my childhood/adolescent/young adult wounds.

In conclusion, from my own personal view, I've come to see preferences like this as a choice, and it is between God and that person, even if it does hurt very deeply. After all, I'm guilty of having my own "preferences," and having to ask God about the areas in which I myself cross over into being shallow.

What do you see as the differences?

For instance, if you hear:

* "I don't find Asians attractive, so don't bother contacting me if you're Asian."

Is this a standard, or is it shallow? If you're Asian or don't have Asian people you are close to, it probably doesn't seem like any big deal. But what if it changes to:

* "I am only attracted to blue-eyed blondes -- any other hair or eye color need not apply."

If this statement now applies to you, does it change your reaction of whether this statement is now a standard, or just being shallow?

And so it goes on.

Let's say YOU the one making these statements from your own point of view:

* "I'll only date someone who meets my criteria for body weight and fitness."

* "I'll only date someone who makes a certain amount and above."

* "I'll only date someone who comes from a certain kind of family."

* "I'll only date someone healthy."

Are these standards, or shallowness?

Now let's change the scenario to someone who is telling YOU:

* "Yeah, you go to the gym 5 times a week, but you don't look like a fitness model and I won't date anything less."

* "Yeah, you make $75,000 a year, but I'm really looking for someone who's making 6 figures, and preferably, the first number isn't just a 1."

* "Yeah, you have a nice Christian family but you don't come from a prestigious Christian family, and that's what I'm looking for."

* "Yeah, your cancer has been in remission for 5 years and you haven't had any problems since, but I want to date someone who doesn't have any signs of chronic disease or sickness."

+ Does this change the way you look at the first set of statements? Does it have any difference as to whether you now see them as being a standard or being shallow?

+ In other words, do the definitions change when we go from being the one who sets the bar, to then being the one who falls short of it?

+ Is a standard only a standard when we get to set it, and is someone who sets standards we don't fit now being shallow?


I find this interesting because it seems nowadays, whether one is a Christian or not, if someone rejects someone else for ANY reason and that person disagrees with why they are being rejected, then obviously, it's because the other person is racist, sexist, a feminist, a toxic male, an ageist (and the list goes on,) not a REAL Christian, or, worst of all, just plain SHALLOW. Now of course, we all know that some set of baseline standards are necessary, but has anyone else noticed this disturbing dynamic? Any form of rejection that someone doesn't like/disagrees with is now being relabeled as "shallowness," shifting the negativity from the person who was rejected to the person who did the rejecting. And I understand this is a very human thing to do. But where are the lines?

It might just me, but I think this is another big way in which Christians are falling prey to the modern cultural message that tells everyone, "You are a beautiful, sparkling snowflake JUST THE WAY YOU ARE, and you have a right to be considered an EQUAL candidate in EVERY and ANY situation. ANYONE who rejects you is SHALLOW and bigoted and it's THEIR loss because they are missing out on the splenderiffic unicorn that is YOU!"

I know rejection hurts all of us, but it makes me wonder about how much of it God wants us to accept and shake off, and how much of it He wants to use to make us honestly face what He is saying needs to be addressed within ourselves (including our own shallowness.)

* How about you?

* What have your experiences been with standards, rejection, and shallowness -- both as the person who was rejected, and as the one doing the rejecting?

* Have we crossed the lines between what reasonable expectations to just looking for any and every excuse to both set our own standards, reject anyone who doesn't meet them, and then simultaneously shame anyone who dares do the same to us?

It is our prerogative to choose our standards for which things are important and how much much importance they are. Someone might consider us to be shallow if they disagree with the standards that we've chosen, but they aren't us and they aren't looking for the same spouse we are. For our own sake we should make sure to evaluate our standards to make sure that we have the right ones and are giving them an appropriate amount of weight. If a woman wants a man who is over 6ft and makes over $100,000, then with just those two things she is looking at less than 5% of men, which is the same group of men that a lot of other woman are looking for, which makes it pretty unlikely for her to find a spouse, especially when other standards are factored in, but if recognizes how much her standards are limiting her available options and she's ok with that, then that's her prerogative.

 

[MsMediator]

There is also that idea that God will find the "perfect" spouse for us, which for some people means that the potential spouse will meet these high standards.

 

[seoulsearch]

There is also that idea that God will find the "perfect" spouse for us, which for some people means that the potential spouse will meet these high standards.

Yes.

A good number of single Christians I've met, especially on the dating sites, believe that because God wants the best for them, God will surely give them what THEY think is best (i.e., meeting their high standards.) And yet...

I loved notmyown's post (in another ongoing thread about her daughter, who married even above what many Christian women are asking for -- a guy who was taller than 6'2"; had TWO iPhones, not just one; and made "well above" $150,000, allowing his wife to be at home with the kids, but that her daughter, who had landed what many women would consider a trophy, was stressed out almost all the time.

It's like I was saying in that thread. People might get their high standards, but they will still have to choose. A woman with a high-earning husband will have to choose if she wants more time with him (lowering their income,) or else she should most likely expect to be a single mom at home who takes care of the entire household to boot, because the husband will be spending the majority of his time at work and have few to no days off.

It's an interesting thing to be a Christian. We believe in miracles. We believe in an exceptional God. Therefore, most of us start out believing that because of this, when it comes to our own wants, God is going to make exceptions. It doesn't matter how unlikely others say it might be -- God works the impossible, so surely that's what He'll make sure we have.

I'm probably a cynic but I just don't think that's how it happens most of the time. It's like whenever I hear about miraculous stories concerning cancer: "The doctors don't know how to explain it, but all the tumors miraculously disappeared!"

Which is awesome, amazing, and wonderful. But it's just not what happens for the majority of believers in that situation. For every miracle I hear about, I'm always thinking of the millions of other believers who didn't get those kinds of results.

I'm sure high standard, miraculous honeymoon marriages are out there. In fact, I'd like to hear more proof that more of them exist rather than a couple here and there. I'd love to see the Family Forum filled with testimonies of formerly high standard singles whom God supplied with high standard "perfect match" spouses.

But that's not what we get. Rather, the Family and Prayer Forums are often flooded with prayer requests over marriages plagued by indifference, unfaithfulness, brokenness, and pornography.

People can keep passing these things by, ever believing that God is going to make them the exception to the masses, for whatever reason.

Once upon, a time, I believed this too.

Plot twist: God did not make me an exception.

I wish the best for all who keep believing that perfect person is out there without them having to tweak any of their expectations. I hope they stick around, because I'd really love to hear how things have turned out, say 10 years later. If they went on to find what they were looking for, great! I'd love to hear about it.

But if they found as well that God did not make them an exception... I'd love to know how they're coping, and what advice they would have for others following the same loop.

 

[seoulsearch]

This conversation reminds me of a situation in a youth group I used to attend in which two young men were vying for the attention of the same girl.

I hope I can say this in a factual, not judgmental manner, but the girl was really, really pretty -- easily an "it" girl, cheerleader type, though they were all in their mid-to-late 20's. The girl was easily the best catch of that age range at the church (looks wise at least; I didn't know her so I'm not sure what her personality was like.)

Each of these young men were not... "in the same league" as this girl when it came to looks. They were both chubby, slightly socially awkward, and the kind of guys people probably would have made fun of at school But each guy felt he "deserved" this girl because each one had lived purely and spent all of his spare time in service at the church.

As the competition grew fiercer, they would each talk about why their own acts of service was more valuable and why God should be on their side, thereby tipping the scales in their favor when winning over this girl.

Ironically, there were several other pure, serving Christian young ladies available in the group that they could have gotten to know and pursued. But none of these other girls were as pretty as this particular one, and everyone knew it.

The pretty girl didn't wind up with either of them (and I believe she wound up leaving the church, though I'm not sure if that had anything to do with it,) but it was quite interesting to observe because each of these men was absolutely sure he "deserved" a girl like that and that God was certainly going to give her to him.

I don't know what happened to one of them, but I know the other moved on and did find someone, but she was not nearly as pretty as this other girl.

I'm not criticizing him for this at all, I'm just saying, he didn't get someone to the standard of looks he started out with, and I don't know if he lowered his standards, or just didn't care about them as much anymore.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

I only have one thing to say as I am very tired.

When my wife and I were dating (and we checked off all the boxes each had for a mate or so we thought) my pastor said. "Wait a year before getting married. Crazy can only hide so long."

I should have listened.

 

[Cameron143]

I only have one thing to say as I am very tired.

When my wife and I were dating (and we checked off all the boxes each had for a mate or so we thought) my pastor said. "Wait a year before getting married. Crazy can only hide so long."

I should have listened.

Everyone is crazy in their own way. The secret to all good relationships is to cover other people's sins the way God has covered yours...unconditional love.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

Nah, there's nutty and then there is straight jacket Crazy

Moving on
I have told all my kids. Take a hard look at the father of the girl your planning to marry. At some point she will compare and see you through the filter she see's her dad. Who is he, what is he like. Is this someone you would want to be seen as?

Same thing with my girls, a boy, and his mother. He will compare you at some point with his mother. Is this someone you want to be compared to or seen as?

 

[Cameron143]

Nah, there's nutty and then there is straight jacket Crazy

Moving on
I have told all my kids. Take a hard look at the father of the girl your planning to marry. At some point she will compare and see you through the filter she see's her dad. Who is he, what is he like. Is this someone you would want to be seen as?

Same thing with my girls, a boy, and his mother. He will compare you at some point with his mother. Is this someone you want to be compared to or seen as?

You moved on too fast. The important part wasn't the first part, but the last part. It's not about other people's actions. It's about how you respond.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

Not exactly sure how to respond other than nutty people can be reasoned with (reasonable) straight jacket crazy...not so much. Just like the guy with the covenant of the sword post. Still on the fence about him. My first interaction. But he seems to keep repeating the same line as if he is saying whatever go fly a kite. Or this is "my truth". No...there is truth.

Yeah I'm fairly black and white. What do you expect? I'm a Gen X. The snowflakes are really starting to pile up.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

Okay this is off topic but it's really coming down here. It's been less than 15 minutes.

 

[Subhumanoidal]

I've never compared a gf to my mom. In fact I find the idea off putting.
Also never known anyone else to have done this, either.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

I get that Subhumanoidal, but psychologically it does happen over time. It's not something people normally do during dating but happens after the honeymoon stage of marriage. In my business I do over 700 appointments a year and get the opportunity to talk to all those clients developing relationship. It's an amazing constant in human nature to see.

 

[Lanolin]

I think it takes time to get to know a person rather than go on first impressions of appearances.

They may have a bad habit that they hide when you are dating. Or they may have good surprises in store. You just dont know, I think people want things instantly these days but even in olden days, they had those shotgun weddings.

Matchmakers the world over often dont even know what will work and what wont. I dont know as I dont go on dating sites anymore I just find them a bit exhausting and artificial. Even if you dont go on them people will still judge on appearances. I had to laugh that one of my friends (now divorced ) said she married her ex-husband because he played Jesus in the church play and that was how she fell in love with him.

even the what you think are solid christian marriages I have found temptations can trip some because I seem to come across women who married in church and got divorced when the man cheated. Or they married an unbeliever yet stayed absolutely faithful to the unbeliever.

so it seems to me marriage cant always be perfect like people are expecting. As for the whole middle class status thing well that maybe the worst as thats when the husbands can afford extra mistresses and the wife has to hide it. They think it wont happen but unfortunately it does.

or the case where, married men have these terrible porn habits. Because its so easy to judge on appearances right.

You may not even know (and this can break a marriage) at first and then years down the track they suddenly lose their temper and hit you or lash out. But i do think in many cases men try to improve themselves for their wives and do better at domestication while women also struggle with being domestic when so many things are pulling them to do more than simply the everyday stuff and especially if they dont have good support networks.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

So I was sharing this thread with my 18 year old daughter and she has this to say:

She knows this couple that holds a lot of life groups, they are married and get along really well. They have joint accounts and the wife told her that every relationship she has seen that has separate bank accounts tend to end in divorce but those that have joint accounts have a greater tendency to survive.

She thinks this has a deeper meaning.

Personally I think she is right. Who can you trust with your finances? And who can trust you with their finances? It's rare to be able to trust someone so emphatically that you can give another full access and control over your money. When you can there is a deep connection that I would say is indicative of a healthy relationship.

 

[Lanolin]

A lot of people dont know where their parents are or worse they have died...it always seemed to me whenver I dated someone they had lost their dad or their mother, so it seems like they had an extra burden to deal with, or their parents were a bit crazy but then even royalty that have a cushion of wealth have odd peeps in their family (not that I ever dated royalty, but just saying)

And nowadays with divorce so prevalent its not uncommon to see people reluctant to marry because of their own parents not getting along. I dont know what the answer is, I think if you have a calling God may want you to do so not necessarily with a spouse.

not to say there arent missionary couples, but I have found talking to divorced wives of pastors sometimes they married just for the status or it was somehow a church requirement that they have a wife and women find they werent allowed to do any church work unless they were married. (which meant, looking after their own children, yes, but that may have not given them time to do anything else)

I dont think the bank accounts thing has much to do with anything, but more the joint accounts is a thing to pay the mortgage off and household expenses. It would be set up anyway you wouldnt expect one person to pay for and be in control of everything. If it was seperate then you just have tenants in common arrangement which anyone can do, nobody really need to be married to do that and live together.

it used to be property was only in the husbands name not BOTH the husband and wifes on the title deed, and her contribution even if it was just looking after the house and raising children and no regular income was not even recognised.

 

[Lanolin]

of course women may change their name to their husbands when married. But nowadays there are many that dont, or they have double barrelled surnames. Men dont actually have to worry about that.
They will always stay Mr, while women go from Miss to Mrs.


Theres also Ms but I dont really get that. These titles seem to have fallen out of use now everyones on first name basis even in church we dont call each other by titles but by our christian names (which can be our given names) however, I have not said to church please call me Lanolin.

In the Bible God does give people new names quite a lot but the practice doesnt seem to extend to churches here, unless they are extreme sects and your name is changed to Hope, Grace Charity or something. its easier if you marry and then have children and then you can freely call them Israel, Lazarus, Caleb, Noah etc. The rest of us tend to hang on to our pagan given names...

 

[seoulsearch]

So I was sharing this thread with my 18 year old daughter and she has this to say:

She knows this couple that holds a lot of life groups, they are married and get along really well. They have joint accounts and the wife told her that every relationship she has seen that has separate bank accounts tend to end in divorce but those that have joint accounts have a greater tendency to survive.

She thinks this has a deeper meaning.

Personally I think she is right. Who can you trust with your finances? And who can trust you with their finances? It's rare to be able to trust someone so emphatically that you can give another full access and control over your money. When you can there is a deep connection that I would say is indicative of a healthy relationship.

I agree with this except I think life happens very differently than how we envision it, and it can become a responsibility to take some precautions.

But please forgive me in that I'm not speaking as an 18-year-old, but rather a jaded old lady.

I'm at at age now where almost all the people marrying in my age range are bringing a lot more to the table than those in their 20's --they have kids (whether young, adolescents, in college, or grown,) careers (that might have come with 401K's and other various benefits,)and sometimes medical issues that might require expensive care.

From what I've read and the people I've spoken to, navigating all these financial landmines is no easy task. Let's say Brother Bill has 2 grown kids he's already put through college. He's retired and lives a frugal but comfortable life.

Then he meets Sister Sally, who has 3 kids of her own but are still in middle/high school. If they get married, is Brother Bill now responsible for putting 3 more kids through college? Will he have to go back to work in order to do it? Is Sister Sally expected to work in order to pay for part of this or will she stay at home? How high of a salary will she be expected to make to contribute to the kids' schooling? Or can Bill stay retired and either not contribute at all, or just throw in what he can afford?

This is just a simplified glimpse into Modern Day Finances. The other thing is that financial situations change throughout our lives, and sometimes people right along with it. Some people can be perfectly normal around, let's say, $40,000, but if one starts making $100,000, things might change. I knew of one couple who, when one spouse started earning 6 figures, that person insisted on certain "privileges", such as dating outside the marriage, because they were bringing in all the money and the other had no education or means to support themself. The high earning spouse now thought they could make all the rules because they made all the money and had all the power.

And it seems that for even older couples, it becomes even more complex -- sorting out things like social security benefits (I've heard of some couples not marrying because they would lose various government assistance, etc.), medical care (long term health insurance policies, etc.), and who gets what when they pass on.

I know pre-nuptial agreements are always treated as being of the devil, but I truly think there are many cases these days where they might be required. If everyone did the right thing and acted in accordance to what God wanted of them, there would be no need. But there's not a single area in life where things go the way God intends.

Having been around older people most of my life, I hear about case after case in which families are fighting over money, whether the elderly relatives are still living or have passed.

I recently read about an older couple in which the wife had a disabled son from previous marriage -- and so she insisted on a prenup in which her funds would go towards caring for her son for the rest of his life (he was not able to care for himself.)

The new husband in this situation had grown children from his own previous marriage, and they would have been eager to take her money and run -- leaving her disabled son with nothing and no means to support himself.

 

[Sculpt]

Hey Everyone,

I was thinking about some issues that have come up in the threads about what singles want in a potential spouse.

I was also thinking of my grandparents, who were married for 64 years (until her death,) and how much different things were then. They knew each other all their lives, as they had grown up together in a one-room school on a farm. They married not because they each met a long list of the other's standards, though I'm sure there were some, but basically, he was a young man, she was a young woman -- they knew each other and each other's families, and liked each other, and so they got married. (My Grandma did have one stipulation, however -- she wouldn't marry my Grandpa until SHE had a certain amount of money in the bank that SHE had earned herself, which was very unusual in those days.)

Fast forward to modern times, and singles today have lists of "requirements" ranging from height to salary to body weight, hair, and eye color that would give all the wish lists given to Santa combined a run for their money.

When does the concept of "having standards" cross over into "being shallow"?

Here's a good example: as most know, I was adopted from Korea and grew up in a small white town with white parents. As a Christian single myself, I have often known guys or have seen profiles in which it says they are NOT attracted to Asian girls AT ALL.

Is this a standard, or is it shallow?

Modern culture has taught me that my knee-jerk reaction is to automatically shout, "RACIST!!!" and go on a loud, raging tyrant about how I should be seen as "EQUAL," but in my heart, I have to talk to God about the fact that maybe some people weren't built to be attracted to Asians. I'm certainly not saying this is absolute, I'm just saying it's something I have to consider.

As I talked to people over time, I also had to consider things like the white guy who grew with two adopted Asian sisters, and he said he wasn't attracted to Asians because it was impossible for him to look at Asian women as anything else but a sister. I have also heard of people who aren't attracted to certain characteristics because they were abused by someone who fit them in the past.

And considering that the most discriminating of all seems to be Asian culture itself (Koreans are expected to marry traditional Koreans with "good" family histories -- adopted Koreans like myself are NOT "real" Koreans, and, in the most extreme cases, not even real people because we have no "roots" -- recorded family history, and therefore, would bring "bad blood" into another family.) There ARE exceptions of course, and this forum has actually blessed me with an amazing traditional Korean friend whom I am VERY thankful for, as his friendship and God's blessing helped close up many of my childhood/adolescent/young adult wounds.

In conclusion, from my own personal view, I've come to see preferences like this as a choice, and it is between God and that person, even if it does hurt very deeply. After all, I'm guilty of having my own "preferences," and having to ask God about the areas in which I myself cross over into being shallow.

What do you see as the differences?

For instance, if you hear:

* "I don't find Asians attractive, so don't bother contacting me if you're Asian."

Is this a standard, or is it shallow? If you're Asian or don't have Asian people you are close to, it probably doesn't seem like any big deal. But what if it changes to:

* "I am only attracted to blue-eyed blondes -- any other hair or eye color need not apply."

If this statement now applies to you, does it change your reaction of whether this statement is now a standard, or just being shallow?

And so it goes on.

Let's say YOU the one making these statements from your own point of view:

* "I'll only date someone who meets my criteria for body weight and fitness."

* "I'll only date someone who makes a certain amount and above."

* "I'll only date someone who comes from a certain kind of family."

* "I'll only date someone healthy."

Are these standards, or shallowness?

Now let's change the scenario to someone who is telling YOU:

* "Yeah, you go to the gym 5 times a week, but you don't look like a fitness model and I won't date anything less."

* "Yeah, you make $75,000 a year, but I'm really looking for someone who's making 6 figures, and preferably, the first number isn't just a 1."

* "Yeah, you have a nice Christian family but you don't come from a prestigious Christian family, and that's what I'm looking for."

* "Yeah, your cancer has been in remission for 5 years and you haven't had any problems since, but I want to date someone who doesn't have any signs of chronic disease or sickness."

+ Does this change the way you look at the first set of statements? Does it have any difference as to whether you now see them as being a standard or being shallow?

+ In other words, do the definitions change when we go from being the one who sets the bar, to then being the one who falls short of it?

+ Is a standard only a standard when we get to set it, and is someone who sets standards we don't fit now being shallow?


I find this interesting because it seems nowadays, whether one is a Christian or not, if someone rejects someone else for ANY reason and that person disagrees with why they are being rejected, then obviously, it's because the other person is racist, sexist, a feminist, a toxic male, an ageist (and the list goes on,) not a REAL Christian, or, worst of all, just plain SHALLOW. Now of course, we all know that some set of baseline standards are necessary, but has anyone else noticed this disturbing dynamic? Any form of rejection that someone doesn't like/disagrees with is now being relabeled as "shallowness," shifting the negativity from the person who was rejected to the person who did the rejecting. And I understand this is a very human thing to do. But where are the lines?

It might just me, but I think this is another big way in which Christians are falling prey to the modern cultural message that tells everyone, "You are a beautiful, sparkling snowflake JUST THE WAY YOU ARE, and you have a right to be considered an EQUAL candidate in EVERY and ANY situation. ANYONE who rejects you is SHALLOW and bigoted and it's THEIR loss because they are missing out on the splenderiffic unicorn that is YOU!"

I know rejection hurts all of us, but it makes me wonder about how much of it God wants us to accept and shake off, and how much of it He wants to use to make us honestly face what He is saying needs to be addressed within ourselves (including our own shallowness.)

* How about you?

* What have your experiences been with standards, rejection, and shallowness -- both as the person who was rejected, and as the one doing the rejecting?

* Have we crossed the lines between what reasonable expectations to just looking for any and every excuse to both set our own standards, reject anyone who doesn't meet them, and then simultaneously shame anyone who dares do the same to us?

I tend to agree with Lynx on these issues. The preferences/standards people have are where they are now, and likely to stay that way. So, what is there to say about it? If someone doesn't like or can't accept something about you, the best gift you can get is to find out as quickly as possible... hopefully saving as much time and hurt as possible.

It's a sad scene when someone marries another with plans on changing them.

I don't think many suitors have convinced anyone to change their minds via persuasive arguments (though I could be wrong). Giving ultimatums about being exclusive or getting married are different, you're just telling someone to make up their mind.

Sure, I think it bites anyone when they don't meet someone's standards. If it's a stranger, that bite should pass very quick. If it's someone you've got attached too, I'm sure that leaves a slow healing scar.


Related issue brought up... if someone is rejecting another at any point, I don't think they should tell them why. But if you've dated someone awhile and they really want to know, it's their decision, it's cruel and selfish not to tell them; swear them to secrecy if necessary.

In a relationship, communication is key,...I don't think it's healthy to keep quiet about things that matter. Don't assume someone can't change something about themselves to stay with you; maybe it's something they want to know and change.

 

[Lanolin]

The how much you may make a year is often dependent on the year you entered the workforce and which role, some organisations dont really have a clear progression or opportunities if you start at the bottom, or conversely its never a fixed thing, so oftens its a bit meaningless. We've had dot-com bubbles and recessions and even govt jobs that might have been secure in the past had huge layoffs. Even professionals cant be guaranteed a steady income. Companies merge and change all the time. Even govt depts can almgamate and every so often they restructure till it becomes a bit of a joke. Then your best bet is to become a consultant or contractor and theres never a fixed income on that. Its the gig economy.

if you stick with what you know say, your parents were doctors going back generations or maybe you were teaches or I dont know, carpenters, or maybe bankers or bakers you may have an idea of what that could afford and you think thats really the life I want then you just go with what you are familiar with. However what youve grown up with may actually not be the reality with todays generation.

it is TOTALLY different. Back then life was a bit simpler say you had your farm and you knew were going to fam that parcel of land and make a living from it and not have it taken from you. But now, farms have been taken over by big agrobusiness.

These days its not how much you earn a year thats the question its more how much DEBT will you have to pay off lol

how can you even guage that. Its a conversation to have for sure because you want to live together right and theres living costs to that. if one person tries to totally control the other thats not right and thats abuse. Recognise it for what it is.

All you can really ask for is that whoever you take as your spouse remains loving and faithful to you, through good times AND bad. This is a promise that you never know until you make it whether it will last thats why its a leap of faith and for sure dont think its never going to be tested.