just another of those 'preferences' people post

or is preference a 'must'?

For some it is. I had a lady telling me that she thought that I'm a great guy but she said that she just dates younger guys and said to me that I should understand because I have my preferences as well. I told her that I'm not that picky though .

Same old argument. If you don't hold out for what you would prefer, you're supposedly settling for just what you can get.

First of all I never said they had to love my kids just at least like them or get along with them. My kids have never been rude to those I have dated. Since most are talking about dating here and not just friends then yes it is pretty important that when they interact with my kids they get along. My kids will always be around and if a man can not get along with them. Honestly there must be something wrong with them...

And no the dog will not go on dates with me...but most likely if we are dating then they will be invited over at times. If the dog is there and they don't like dogs allergic to dogs or mean to my dog then yes we have a problem..

As far as saying one is heartless if they don't get along with my kids or dog. If that bothers one then that is cause they have never met either. I don't have spoiled kids that are rude or not caring both are actually very easy going and my dog is about as lovable as one can get.

And yes if I was dating someone and if it was clear they did not get along with my kids or my dog it would make me reconsider what kind of person they really are....I would never tolerate anyone that was rude to either....

Must love dogs, kids and god"
Does it have to be in that order

Perhaps not in that order? However, it might suggest that #4 on the priority list may be the highest available position.

Sounds like the person the OP is talking about has different preferences than he does. Why not just move onto someone who has preferences that match up better?

I would. If she's saying that she wants a "God fearing man", that isn't me and I would just be wasting my time and hers. Someone like that would try to convert you anyway and I can't be doing with that. I get enough of that from my mother. When I used to say that I wasn't a Christian and that I didn't believe in it she would just pigheadedly insist that I am and that I do, as if that would make it so.

As far as the kids go; yeah, I've dated single mothers and I don't have a problem with that but I haven't had anyone asking me to play daddy to them either. When I met my ex her daughter was thirteen and was your typical cheeky teenager. She wasn't a bad girl but she wasn't particularly interested in getting to know me and the one time that we all went out to the cinema together she just sat away from us at the back of the bus and she wouldn't let me buy her any popcorn or anything. I said to my ex that I would like it if her daughter liked me but my ex just said, "Don't worry about her. It's me that you have to keep happy". It was difficult just having to sit there saying nothing when the girl gave her mother a lot of cheek but I talked to her about that and she said that she gave as good as she got and she had been bringing the girl up on her own since she got custody and came back here from America and you can't just walk into a situation like that and try to fix something that isn't broken. I don't really have a problem with kids but I've got none of my own and haven't had to deal with them since I was one. I would just be polite to the girl and give her money ocasionally so that she could go out with her friends.

Went out with one once that had a two year old. She actually brought the kid along to the restaurant. Didn't exactly help to make it romantic. At least with my ex we had been seeing each other for a while before she introduced me to her daughter. She didn't want to do that until she felt that the relationship might be going somewhere. When I read profiles saying that they want someone that's going to take their kids on as well I'm a bit wary, to be honest. I'm not really in a position to financially support somebody else's children and I don't know if I really want to wipe their backsides for them. I'm not looking to jump straight into living with someone and their kids. Not saying that I wouldn't want a family but I would want to start off by just dating and seeing how that goes. Obviously, if I'm dating a woman with kids, I'm going to have to accept that their needs come before mine but that can actually work quite well if you're happy just spending quality time together with a woman and have your own life as well.

The OP (that would be me) was motivated to post the topic after receiving five "matches" from a site, four of which had one or more of the "must" items in profile -- while listing "friendship" as at least one of the objectives identified.

It seems rather silly to require that friends "love dogs, children and god" -- though that may be understandable if the objective is to find a mate (which could be the true agenda, rather than friendship).

Some of them do that because they want to do the "just starting off as friends first" thing and that's a sign that you aren't going to get anything in the way of romance or sex until you've spent a lot of time getting to know her. There was one on here that had been in abusive relationships that said that she was just looking for friendship. I think that she had a hidden agenda but was just very wary of men.

Either way, it is a bit offputting if you're looking for more than friendship. It's going to be hard work to get anywhere with a woman like that. Someone else that's more old fashioned than I am might be more into that though. To me, it just says that they don't really trust men and probably won't be my type because it's like putting, "Not looking for sex and leave me alone if you are" on a profile.

Other ones are possibly just saying that they want to spend eons chatting on the internet before they will even consider meeting you.

One interpretation of the meaning of specifying "must love dogs, children and god" is that the person is not willing to develop friendship with anyone unless they qualify as a potential mate.

The silliest I recall is a woman who listed "pen pal" as one of her "looking for" (don't remember what else) and specified "must not smoke." What does she do -- sniff the email for tobacco odor?

loving kids and dogs seems logical , they exist and they need our love , but what about the last one ?

Dogs are excellent judges of character and are definitely furry little angels( or huge ones!)

I have no comment about anyone "loving" kids and dogs -- provided that they do not REQUIRE that I participate. However, when those are identified as priorities, it suggests to me that a woman may have limited her interests and conversations (though she might have once been interesting).



When a person refuses to be friends with those who do not share their religious opinions and preferences (or belief in their favorite "god"), it suggests to me that they are disrespectful of the opinions or beliefs of others, that they are insecure in their own beliefs and do not want them questioned, and/or they feel that their opinions and beliefs are superior to those of others. None of which are appealing to me.

narrow mind fears to be liberated , limitation of its choices is a reflex attempt to protect it from the change .

Yeah, that's actually quite reasonable. I've done the penpal thing and quite often I have a smoke when I'm typing those messages. Not every woman is going to want to read a lot of nonsensical drivel written by a guy that's stoned.

But I think that you might be right. I started a topic on here before about women that say that they are extremely friendly and easy going but they don't reply when you send them a friendly message. It's no wonder that so many people get fed up with that and it's almost enough to give a guy a complex, or to just think that these women are so full of themselves that they think that you're not worthy of their friendship.

For the record, I like (reserve "love" for humans) SOME dogs and have had two exceptional obedience-trained dogs over the years. Recently I told a friend "Your dog is welcome in my house any time", reflecting that he does whatever she says, displays more "sense" than most animals, and doesn't seek attention, jump or climb on people, bark needlessly, etc.

However, the vast majority of dogs I observe or encounter are untrained and poorly behaved -- often allowed to do whatever they wish -- including annoy owners and others.

A lot of children are not much better behaved than nuisance dogs. I am not gaga over infants / children and prefer adult interaction (personal preference -- taught college rather than kindergarten).

I do NOT accept a demand that I "love" dogs or children BEFORE I meet them.

Regarding "gods": Everyone is entitled to their opinions and preferences regarding supernaturalism. Any of the thousands of "gods" proposed, worshiped, feared, loved by humans MAY be real -- but I have encountered no verifiable information to that effect. Therefore, I do not worship or idolize any of them.

If religion is a (or the) major focus of a woman's life we can be friends but not likely very close.

"must"

ok, I'm leaving now :)

I just think its a way for these ladies to weed out guys that don't like these things. You can think of it as a way of weeding out these women as well and you won't waste time getting to know them if you already know you don't want kids, pets, or religion in the relationship.

Agreed. Those who prioritize such things in profile eliminate themselves from my consideration and save time.

It is NOT that I don't want kids, pets or religion in a relationship, but rather that I refuse to be REQUIRED to "love" such things in advance in order to "qualify" for friendship. Note the emphasis on "friendship" rather than coupledom.

Some children are pleasant, some pets are well-behaved, and religion can be unobtrusive BUT when a person is fanatical about any or all of those I have no interest.