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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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?