Do you have to offer that which you want in others?

Yes I want unconditional love and I give unconditional love.

Yeah, but at the same time, for some people opposites do attract. There are things you can find in others that you don’t necessarily have in yourself, hence you compliment each other well and create a balance.

I have most of what I want in return. I love to give and recieve. Some things, however, my boyfriend possesses that I do not. Then again, I have things about me that he doesn’t. It all works out :) In my world, as long as together you make what you both believe to be a “perfect person” then it’s all good!

Totally. GQ.

@Chongalicious What of the notion that you should both be individuals, whole people on your own merits, not together?

If you had a huge ego and your partner had one too it most likely wouldn’t work out. So I figure people need partners that complement and complete them. Kinda like a puzzle piece.

I choose someone because he wants to accept me the way I am. And he must accept me the way I am if wants to get along with me. So,we offer each other what we originally have in ourselves. offering the same thing isn’t the only way to sustain a relationship.

@Chongalicious I’d say that if you’re not complete with out something/someone you probably won’t be complete with it/them.

@Milk But this is about qualities you want from a partner – do people normally want partners with a huge ego?

@Simone_De_Beauvoir we are both whole, but neither of us is perfect (of course). He is better than me in certain aspects, and vice versa. The point is that together you make one even more amazing person, that you’re better together than alone.

@Chongalicious I’d say we’re better together than part in certain circumstances but that, when separate, we can still be just as good.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir True, and sorry if I wasn’t clear in my first response…I didn’t mean to make it sound as if we couldn’t exist without eachother, because clearly we can lol, it’s just way better together a lot of times :)

Yes I’m an honorable, loyal, intelligent, and attractive person and I want the same. I would just hope that she’s less annoying than me though but she can be really rich. There’s only room for one pain in the ass in a relationship but there’s always room for more payola.

@SeventhSense My god, you’re such a charmer – too bad I’m not rich, ‘cause I’d so be there.

I don’t think so beyond some of the basics for me. I would want an honest, loyal man, steady and turue as they say. But if he was also a wonderful musician, I still think it would work if the spark was there. I am not a musician, can’t even hum a tune. Couples where each one has different passions are everywhere.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir
Could be fun if one of us lived through the night.~

@SeventhSense granted

@Simone_De_Beauvoir and @SeventhSense I just ran out of body bags…

I guess we’ll have to wait to see who posts next….

It’s important that people have the same core values. Temperament and interests may be wildly different, but core values need to be the same for a relationship to work.

I’ve noticed that people who have the same interests but are vastly different may be attracted to each other in a superficial way. Someone may find someone totally different than them attractive as a form of wishful thinking, wanting to have those attributes by association. It may work for awhile, but it often falls apart.

The non physical stuff, yeah.

I guess they’re both dead

@SeventhSense no one’s dead…he meant body bags ‘cause we’d kill each other, you and me..not him and me

That is an amazing question! Thanks, now I have something to contemplate :)

Thoughts before contemplation: 1.) I agree we do have to have something, at least a little bit, before we can ask for it in others, 2.) Someone who has it more than you, can bring it out more in you, 3.) But you have to be lucky enough to already be the owner of a developed trait, that they too can benefit and learn from, then you have a fair relationship, and 4.) Why have relationships if we don’t have anything to teach each other? Shouldn’t we recognize the need for something, and then get help from others in developing it? We can’t do this all alone.

I guess that leaves me wondering…maybe we have to hope we learned enough from our parents, our time alone, and our first relationships, to have something to offer the person who has a lot to teach you?

@chamelopotamus Yes, that is definitely the hope, :)

@Simone_De_Beauvoir
You got the jump on him huh?

@SeventhSense not yet…too early in the evening

Absolutely not. I want a wealthy babe, and I am broke.

@davidbetterman you and @SeventhSense can get together.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I don’t swing that way.

@davidbetterman I thought you were married

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Aren’t you?

@davidbetterman yeah, why?

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Don’t you guys swing?

@davidbetterman guess I didn’t know you guys do as well

This is a really great question. I’d have to say I don’t have a lot of qualities I would look for in a partner. Well I do but they all all mushed up inside me. Thanks for reminding me.

@Just_Justine :)

Yes

No. I think some complementarity is excellent and desirable. If what you are speaking of is values, then yes, I think it’s very important to have shared values (such as loyalty and truthfulness).

But many traits are unequally distributed. A person need not, for example, have high energy or an outgoing social nature in order to seek those traits in another. The best relationships seem to me to emphasize compatibility, which is likely to involve a mixture of duplicated and nonduplicated qualities; or, more precisely, unequal amounts of the same qualities (since hardly anyone is at 0% or 100% on any dimension).

Example 1: She is socially gregarious and he is introverted. She is like his link to the rest of the world. He reflects her private, inward-facing side.

Example 2: She is ambitious and fast-paced, and he is laid back and even a little lazy. With him she slows down a little bit and relaxes. He gives her relief from her breakneck speed. And he can enjoy some benefits of her tireless efforts.

Example 3: She is plain, and he could be a big-screen heart throb. She is head-over-heels thrilled to receive the attentions of such an attractive man, and he adores her. He is also insecure enough to be happy not worrying constantly about rivalry, never mind looking after a high-maintenance princess. (Besides, I think her unglamorous looks may lead some folks to wrong conclusions about her style in private.)

These relationships work, even if they wouldn’t work for all of us. Don’t we all have some kind of complementarity in our primary relationships, when you think about it? This does not mean that any one of us is less of a person but only that we understand partnership.

@Jeruba I don’t think I meant some of those qualities – how socially comfortable one is, well that doesn’t really matter – it doesn’t say anything about a person, it’s just a facet. Same thing with being ‘plain’ or a ‘heart-throb’ – no one goes into a relationship desiring someone plain – maybe they do, I don’t know, but as you said (given his insecurity) that reflects more on them, really. I guess I meant more of the qualities that people complain their partners don’t have which I think they should have themselves first – if you want a punctual partner and you’re always late, that’s a problem; if you want someone who’s romantic but you don’t care to pay them compliments, then what’s wrong with you?

What happened to my above post? Are the mods just removing answers now?