You know what’s a ‘deal breaker’? Deal breakers

Trevor says:

08:06am | 01/11/12

Flippantly dismissive? Deal breaker!

Black Dyanmite says:

07:39am | 01/11/12

This was more entertaining than the actual article.

BD

Jess says:

08:50am | 01/11/12

battles worth fighting… Guys porn stash not one of them…
I’m a girl and my boyfriend has a porn stash (computer) and I have a porn stash (erotica books). It’s not even worth discussing. You should watch that episode of One tree hill in season 2 where Hayley finds Nathan’s porn stash. it’s an issue if your 17 but beyond that nope.

GigaStar says:

08:55am | 01/11/12

For you Joan Bennett, just being male would be a deal-breaker.

Markus says:

08:57am | 01/11/12

Only someone with extreme personal hangups would consider porn to amount to an overall general disrespect of all women.

che says:

09:02am | 01/11/12

What if a woman likes porn? Does she have no respect for women?

AFR says:

09:09am | 01/11/12

Joan, i can guarantee you your boyfriend has a stash.

Elphaba says:

09:30am | 01/11/12

But if the women are participating voluntarily in porn, how is it disrespecting them?

Louise says:

10:08am | 01/11/12

Oh Joan, the pro-pornies are piling onto you - I can’t let you go unsupported!

I guess I’m ‘old-fashioned’, but I wouldn’t be thrilled about a bloke in his thirties still feeling the need for a ‘porn stash’, either. And I do think a lot of what’s out there is, in itself, degrading to women in general (not to say men looking at it hate women - they can’t help what the porn-providers serve up, after all).  Maybe I just haven’t been lucky enough to come across the better quality stuff - that doesn’t involve more spraying than an afternoon spent hosing the garden, more holes than a golf course, and more angry faces and ‘tough talk’ than question time. But then, I’m not looking; it’s one ‘sport’ I prefer as a participant rather than a spectator. Each to their own.

AFR, hope that’s that a Gillard/Swan-type guarantee you’re offering.

neo says:

10:17am | 01/11/12

Lol @ any male who doesn’t look at porn. Sad.

Tubesteak says:

10:18am | 01/11/12

Only a deeply insecure woman who knows she can’t keep a man satisfied has an issue with porn and the male expression of sex drive.

A man’s interest in porn has nothing to do with his respect for women.

PsychoHyena says:

11:38am | 01/11/12

Interesting how the concept of porn is that it is disrespectful of women, does this mean then that gay porn is okay because it doesn’t involve women? Or what about porn aimed towards women rather than men? Wouldn’t that be disrespectful of men?

neo says:

11:50am | 01/11/12

Twilight is porn aimed at women. And it actually DOES disrespect males.

Philosopher says:

12:41pm | 01/11/12

neo, looking at Kristen Stewart’s twig-like figure and perpetually sour expression, it’s certainly not porn aimed at men.

Jenni says:

01:00pm | 01/11/12

@Joan Bennett “only a boy would not consider porn to be a deal breaker”

Wow - judgmental AND sexist AND stereotyping all in one sentence!

For the record, I am a woman. I am a strong woman, I don’t put up with any kind of abuse (physical or mental) in a relationship and would never tolerate being degraded or disrespected by a man. And I love porn! Good porn (yes, it does exist) is a powerful aphrodisiac, great foreplay, or sometimes it’s just plain fun! While *some* porn does, certainly, disrespect women, so too do many mainstream films, tv shows, books etc. You can’t judge the entire genre on a few bad apples.

Nor should you judge men OR women on their personal tastes simply because *you* have a particular opinion about something! You could learn a little about respect yourself, I think, by not projecting your own ideals and beliefs on an entire gender.

Elphaba says:

01:12pm | 01/11/12

Also, this doesn’t take into account the consenting couples who use porn as part of their sex life…

Louise says:

02:07pm | 01/11/12

Psst, Joan - r u OK? Not “naked* and huddled” like Alan Jones?

*no porn reference intended

GigaStar says:

08:53am | 01/11/12

Bogan accents?

Philsopher says:

01:01pm | 01/11/12

confirms that the brain’s processing power peaks at around 18, only to decline with age

Cop That!! says:

03:33pm | 01/11/12

“Alpha Male’.....

Now there’s a term I’ve heard many times over the past two years!! Used to work with a bloke who in all seriousness, would call himself an ‘Alpha Male’. And a God. He’d come out with gems such as “Fifty percent of the men in Australia should be culled so only the ‘alpha-males’ like me can reproduce’. He cried because his old school didn’t have a building or a swimming pool named in dedication to him. He was in the police service, and would bitch that he hadn’t received a bravery medal because, well, he was one of the BEST EVER police officers the Commissioner had ever seen, and secondly, he deserved one!! The Commissioner had no idea who this person was.

This is a man who literally ran away in flight when the father of one of his ex-girlfriends was coming to the City to speak to him about his behaviour.

If any woman dating him disagreed with his self-assessment, he’d sulk and have an absolute fit. He’d brag at work how ‘Australian men’ (which he was one) would come to him to seek his advice & counsel about anal sex, “....because he was all wise & knowing, and of course, he’s a GOD!!”

He even said to me one day that if my parents or my friends parents ever met him, they would physically get down on their knees in front of him because he’s “a God”.

If anybody disagreed, his response was to hold the phone out and tell you to phone his mother or brother, because “They will tell you how good I am!!”.

He’d make up things like how he was invited to join a state dance/ballet company because everybody thought he was so good. This was all in his head because he won 3rd place in a beginners class in Latin Ballroom. Watching him dance was like watching elephants trying to master choreography to the Benny-Hill theme (no offence to elephants, or Benny Hill).

I thought he was joking when I first heard of and saw this. But no, this bloke was serious. He would go on and on and on about people being scared of him…..apparently people were threatened by him because he was a wind-surfer (the fact is that he can hardly stand up on the board). So I nick-named him ‘Wog-Bouy’ (horrible, I know! But it couldn’t be helped).

One poor girl who date him mentioned a friend of hers who actually did receive a bravery award or such regarding the Black Saturday bushfires, and the same friend was a professional sportsman and medic….to which Mr Alpha Male yelled “But he’s nowhere near as good an alpha male as I am!!”.

I wish I had used my tape recorder at work to record some of his ramblings. He was 44, still living more or less with his mum who did all his washing, ironing, bought his food, and household white-goods. He would claim he was of higher intelligence than every other Australian male (but dropped out of Uni - twice - because he couldn’t understand the work). His brothers all turned out okay.

I’ve met a couple of the women who want to breed with him. My goodness. Total fruitcakes. He walked around a restaurant one day introducing himself to complete strangers telling people he was “an Alpha-Male”. He then ate a plate full of tandoori chicken extra spicey, in silence, then went and sat in the car and cried….tears running down his face, because nobody understood how “good he his”

I sh*t you not!! And this bloke used to carry a gun for his job…...

PsychoHyena says:

11:41am | 01/11/12

@AdamC, I agree, I couldn’t be in a relationship with anyone as skinny or skinnier than myself, bone rubbing against bone is just too painful.

Louise says:

10:09am | 01/11/12

Agree. I liked this article.

spellcheck says:

11:11am | 01/11/12

Watch it with the spelling condemnation, Tubesteak.  3 times, you incorrectly used ‘it’s’, when you meant ‘its’.

Normally, I wouldn’t point it out, but if you’re gong to dish it out, spell check first.

Tubesteak says:

11:44am | 01/11/12

Apostrophes can also be used for ownership and not just contractions.

Pattem says:

12:29pm | 01/11/12

@Tubesteak, but it’s and its is the exception to that statement.  The distinction and functions of both are clearly and grammatically defined.

Its = possessive. E.g., Its [the dog] ball is over there.
It’s = contraction of “it is”.  E.g., It’s a nice day.

The scenario I love is, pluralising words with ‘s.  I had a good chuckle the other day when I saw a line, that indicated, [paraphrasing]:  Get your towel’s, bathrobe’s and sock’s.

spellcheck says:

12:47pm | 01/11/12

Not in ‘it’s v its’ case.  Its = possessive.  It’s = contraction (it has/it is). 

“A leopard doesn’t change it has/it is spots”.  See?  It doesn’t make sense.

Tubesteak says:

01:26pm | 01/11/12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe#Possessive_apostrophe
‘twould seem there is still some debate, either way. I do not know to which “authorities” it refers to but there is none in this country.

Pattem says:

02:02pm | 01/11/12

@spellcheck

Wrong = A leopard doesn’t change IT’S spots (it is/has)
Correct = A leopard doesn’t change ITS spots (possessive ‘of’)
The ‘of’ version = The spots OF the leopard don’t change.

Possession is denoted with the use of OF, not HAS.

It has, can be contracted to it’s, but will not demonstrate possession.  For example: It’s been beautiful weather so far today.
Expanded: It has been beautiful weather so far today.

Note, there is no indication of possession in the weather example, rather it is a verbal form: the past particple has been contracted.

Hope this helps!

Pattem says:

02:16pm | 01/11/12

@Tubesteak

And to quote from your article:

Possessive pronouns and adjectives

No apostrophe is used in the following possessive pronouns and adjectives: yours, his, hers, ours, its, theirs, and whose.

The apostrophe s rule is typically reserved for nouns.  Where a pronoun is concerned, there is no apostrophe s.

The other thing to consider is that a plural noun just adds the apostrophe, not the S as well.  So that:

The dog of the neighbours, becomes
The neighbours’ dog. 

Many people try to write:  The neighbours’s dog - this is incorrect.

spellcheck says:

02:23pm | 01/11/12

In any case Tubesteak, schools and writers everywhere see that as the definition.  Perhaps it’s one of the hazards of a language that is still evolving, and ‘rules’ that almost always have an exception.

The Oxford English Dictionary agrees, I personally consider that to be a pretty safe bet, authority wise.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/its?q=its

spellcheck says:

02:33pm | 01/11/12

@Pattem, I know.  I was pointing out that ‘it’s’, when not contracted, forms ‘it has/it is’, and therefore, the sentence about the leopard didn’t make sense.

Sorry, I should have been clearer.

GigaStar says:

02:43pm | 01/11/12

Tubesteak this is what is got from your link

It says it’s now unanimous that “it’s” can be only a contraction of it is or it has. It sounds from the article like plebs that don’t know their grammer use “it’s” the wrong way (probably in the US, their grammer is shit) but the authorities have ruled.

Every website I’ve looked at say you’re wrong about using the apostrope so it’s about a couple of 100 to 1 against you. But really - don’t reference a wikipedia article - wikipedia is full of alot of shit and hardly proves anything.

Pattem says:

03:14pm | 01/11/12

@ GigaStar, you are so funny.  Thanks for the laugh.

“...plebs that don’t know their grammer use…”

That’d be GRAMMAR

@spellcheck,  only after the comments posted fully did I see the context in which you were commenting.

AdamC says:

11:06am | 01/11/12

Audra Blue, I think those things (smoking aside) pretty much go without saying. As such, I don’t think calling them ‘dealbreakers’ is really in the spirit of the article.

Philosopher says:

01:20pm | 01/11/12

pity… Angelina Jolie was asking about you the other day. I’ll ring her up and tell her you’re not interested.

bec says:

04:38pm | 01/11/12

So, basically you want a housewife who doesn’t read Twilight.

Good luck finding that, buddy.

Tubesteak says:

06:55pm | 01/11/12

Housewives are wife material.

neo says:

11:29am | 01/11/12

Don’t be retarded. Lying/cheating/stealing/killing/running around the streets naked/injecting heroin in the eyeball all go without saying. Use some common sense.

I’m not talking about the right to vote, I’m talking about “I refuse to cook for you because I’m a feminist” and general acceptance that males and females have their own gender roles to play.

If she is tattooed, but the most amazing person in the world apart from that, it’s a MAJOR DEAL BREAKER.

Who needs luck when you got ‘eroin….eeerrr, I mean, I already found a non tattooed girl whom I am marrying.

Elphaba says:

12:41pm | 01/11/12

@neo, don’t call me names.  It doesn’t always go without saying.  Plenty of people accept clearly appalling behaviour from the opposite sex, whilst sweating the small stuff.

So the role of a woman is to cook for her husband?  I would have thought both partners contribute equally.  Both cook, both clean, both raise babies.  You know, a partnership.  All roles are up for grabs.

GigaStar says:

01:01pm | 01/11/12

neo - running around the streets naked is a deal-breaker - that’s half the guys I’ve dated

Cooking depends - if you’re both working full time and she refuses to do the cooking if you’re not contributing to an equal household chore then that’s not her being feminist - it’s you being lazy

neo says:

11:32am | 01/11/12

Selection is poor in Sydney :(

Although if you keep looking, you will eventually find someone that ticks the boxes.

Tubesteak says:

11:52am | 01/11/12

Zeta
Not sure why you turned this into a men vs women thing and then bragged. Even I avoided that temptation.

neo
There are plenty of women in Sydney that are good for a meaningful overnight relationship.

GigaStar says:

01:21pm | 01/11/12

Look the sky is pink and it’s raining donuts - now back to the real world.

Evalee - are you about 12 years old? Been watching too much Hannah Montana? Or are you self-interested, shallow and superficial? Real relationships are never this easy, especially the passionate ones. It’s all too easy to just walk and just too hard for phonies to work things through like a mature adult. Don’t worry, you’ll grow up one day, have a mature relationship and realise just how infantile you sound.

“If you no longer like their company, don’t hang out with them.  Too easy.” - not so if you have children with the person, need to get a divorce and split assets, or if you’re leaving for some shallow reason (which sounds like you would) and the other person will be deeply hurt. A bit more thought has to go into it than just flighty, airhead brain-farts.

Evalee says:

02:58pm | 01/11/12

@Giga thanks for your assumptions.  Let me deal with them.

If you are in a passionate relationship and things are tough and you are still there, I must assume you WANT to be there.  You are not in the relationship by force.  This is your choice and you must accept what comes along with that.  Good to hear you want to work on it and see it through.  But again, your choice - no one is forcing you.

Saying people can’t make a change in their lives because you have children is a cop out.  People can’t make changes in their lives because they are too scared.  Because they don’t want the work, effort and uncertainty that comes with moving out of their comfort zone and embracing a new beginning.  It is easier to stay with the devil you know…

Splitting assets etc is nothing compared to living your life with someone you don’t care about or who doesn’t care about you.  Perhaps you value your financial position more than your peace of mind/contentment? 

Hey!! Wait a minute, how about not tying yourself body and soul to a ‘lifestyle’ and then getting pissy because you feel tied down and can’t leave a relationship which has passed its used by date?

Make your choices and live with them.  Or be an adult and make changes.  Either is possible.

Philosopher says:

03:06pm | 01/11/12

whoa…sounds like Evalee and GigaStar are going to be ‘besties’...

GigaStar says:

04:17pm | 01/11/12

Evalee - thanks for making your assumptions

“Hey!! Wait a minute, how about not tying yourself body and soul to a ‘lifestyle’ and then getting pissy because you feel tied down and can’t leave a relationship which has passed its used by date?”

How about it - I’m not in a relationship so who’s the pissy one - I walked after a year and a half - but hey don’t let the facts get in your way. No one is in a relationship by force, of course (you’re telling me to suck eggs).

“Saying people can’t make a change in their lives because you have children is a cop out.  People can’t make changes in their lives because they are too scared.”

It not always because of being scared - you sound like you’d walk if the wind blew the wrong way. You walk for the big things, not the pissy little things. Walk when it’s big - the little things can be fixed with a little effort. Just because someone pisses you off sometimes doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be together.

“Perhaps you value your financial position more than your peace of mind/contentment?”

Honey I’ve never been with a man that earns more than me - it’s me that always earns the big bucks in the relationship - so no financials don’t worry me.

Relationships always need to be worked on my dear. You’ll learn that one day when you’re an adult. Like I said, it’s raining donuts in your little world -

Evalee says:

05:11pm | 01/11/12

@Giga how do you come to the conclusion that I treat relationships as disposable by my pointing out that people do not have to be stuck in unhappy and unhealthy ones?

How does pointing out the option make me immature?  Did I say that people should walk away for frivolous reasons?  No.  I did not.

I don’t know what you are arguing with me about.  I read back through my posts and nowhere do I even suggest that you shouldn’t work on your relationships.

What I do say is that you don’t have to stay with someone in a relationship that is unhappy or unhealthy.  What part of the statement do you have a problem with?

neo says:

02:36pm | 01/11/12

Asian women are the least likely to shave armpits/another place.