Group therapy in a blog.
Honesty and the Zen of Matchmaking
One of my upcoming events has me presiding over a group discussion at NYC’s Skirball Center on the subject of “dating and Jewish ethics.” (November 28th, $10, or free if you email me to register in advance.) Among the items I’m hoping to address is the issue of “full disclosure” when it comes to setting people up. How much about a person’s past (or present) do you reveal before a first date? How much of it is really important, and how much is hearsay, conjecture, and personal bias?
I’ve argued before, in this space and in others, that we often know too much about our blind dates that influences the framework in which we see them. Even before we’ve met, if I know someone’s age or profession, I might make certain negative assumptions, and hold to those assumptions even if the date itself is going well. (And by “I,” I’m using myself as “Everydater.”)
Some things are objective: a person is so many feet tall, or is an accountant. (Sorry, accountants. I don’t know why I’m picking on you.) But then there’s the other stuff that people tell us about prospective dates that we probably don’t need to know in advance of a first meeting. “He’s not that tall or attractive, but he’s a nice guy,” does not have a single gal looking eagerly forward to the date. “She’s kind of boring, but I understand that once you get to know her, she’s really got a good heart,” sounds like a compliment. But her prospective dates will likely remember the negative, rather than be open-minded. Not every person has a good sense of humor; not every 40-year-old looks like an old man; not every accountant is boring. (Although in my experience, it takes an exceptional person to defy that last norm.)
In reading this post at SerandEz, whose blog I don’t visit enough, I became aware that this isn’t just my problem. Especially within the religious Jewish community, there are certain things that people leave out of their conversations with the matchmakers. For example, if someone was in some way “off the derech” (off the path of religious Judaism) at some point in their past–instances of eating disorders, drug use, depression and promiscuity might be examples–that might be left out. Not exactly a lie, but not exactly truth either. Aside from a kind of disturbing but not unsurprising tendency to connect homosexuality with child abuse, the comments section reveals some interesting theoretical situations and responses to some of the questions brought up by the issue of honesty in matchmaking situations.
So the larger question is, how would you handle such situations? Say you’re setting someone up with someone else who “has a past”–would you reveal all, or be selective about what you reveal? And what if you’re the one being set up….would your answer differ? Would you want to know about high school drug use, even if the person is reformed? What about learning disabilities or a history of depression? What about whether a person has been married and divorced before?
How much would you want to know about a person before you even get to know a person?
Age, Occupation, Current Residence, Favorite Hobby & One NICE POSITIVE THING. That’s all that should be said by a well-meaning friend attempting to set up A DATE. It is up to the DATERS to slowly find out everything about each other before hopping into bed or getting married (depending on “where they are holding”).
If the prospective daters don’t want accept the date based on those pieces of information, then the well-meaning friend should abort the attempted first-date set-up. No reason to spread info to people who don’t trust you enough when you say “I think I have somebody you should meet.” When a friend says that to me I consider it a hugh compliment and take their word for it and say “great, thanks”, not “oh crap…what kind of nightmare are you trying to get me into” , ’cause if a friend is trying to get me into a bad situation then they don’t have my back the way a friend should.
A professional match-maker or a rabbi should PROFESSIONALLY reveal more confidential information as the need arises.
I agree with Chutzpah. If someone whom I know and respect would want to fix me up, I would assume that the person they have in mind is fairly appropriate for me in terms of intelligence, life view, attractiveness etc. I might want to know a couple of points of interest – maybe where they are from, or what they do, or like to do – but more so we could have something on which to start the conversation. And if there are big deal breakers – say religion – that can be dealt with on the first phone call or coffee date. But all that should be left up to the daters to figure out on their own.
I’ve seen too many possible relationships never have a chance because questions were asked in advance.
I think what Chutzpah says makes a lot of sense. Name, rank & serial number, and not much else are plenty to go on for a start. Marital status is about the only thing I’d add here. Now some things I’d never share with a match maker for obvious reasons.
1.) I’m seriously cranky. I’ve been cranky all my life. I told my wife this when we first met, and added the caveat that ‘it’ll only get worse with age’. I’ve been true to my word, and she hers. Nothing you could put in a profile though.
2.) I don’t watch too much TV or see many movies. Most of your current pop culture references will be lost on me. But I can discuss literature and even politics at great length.
3.) How bad is the above affliction? Well I can discuss politics of the ‘home country’ with almost anyone, from my Pakistani dry cleaners, to stray Canadian car dealers. I can and regularly do converse on scientific topics ranging from population statistics to metallurgy. This tends to bore the daylights out of the younger set.
4.) Worse I’m semi conversant in many areas of history going back thousands of years, so most of my references are lost on those of tender age, under age 90 say. I try not to hold it against anyone.
5.) I will hold it against you if you are clueless about current events & history. If you are a big time reporter who does not know that a battalion is smaller than a division but much larger than a squad, I’ll call you a dolt. To your face if I have to. This applies to Congresscritters too. And yes, most of the times the examples are much more egregious. Worse if your lying wholesale.
6.) If you are clueless about your job, and this seems simple enough to perform, I will complain, and loudly if necessary. Delivering coffee w/o any cream is not a ‘complete’ job. And it’s not difficult to comprehend either. Service is mostly a relatively simple concept. Your business depends upon it, so why not take it as seriously as you do your customers.
7.) Like I said, seriously cranky. A job worth doing is worth doing well. You owe it to yourself & the people you serve to render your best to and for them.
8.) Again setting myself apart from the mainstream, I don’t do debt too often. Unless for business purposes, and then only rarely, I like to carry no debt. You’d not believe how much more simple this makes life.
9.) Ergo, I don’t spend as much as or how others might suspect. This now would seriously annoy, say most everyone under the age of 50. Some might call me a ‘cheapskate’ but then again, they’ve never met the wife.
10.) Still, We’re incredibly generous and give away a substantial portion of our income every year.
And I’ve been the same way most of my life. No depression. Not much drink. No smoking, gambling, no psychiatric aliments or afflictions. Not too tall. Owns a few suits. Likes all sorts of strange music, can’t dance much. I think the latter descriptors would apply to many guys of a certain age. The unique thing is that I’ve not changed much over the years. Still, I suspect it would be a marketing challenge in any case! Cheers, ‘VJ’
I agree w/ Chutzpah. Most people don’t realize that for a marriage to be successful, both partners have to be not only in love w/ each other, from an emotional perspective, but must rationally be committed to their partners happiness above all else. Of course, I am speaking of maintaining legal sanctities only.
The reason that marriages fail is when one or both partners forget this important fact.
Thus, for daters all manners of quirks are not relevant, since the point of the date is, depending on their outlook, to see if there is a spark, magic, something of an attraction that will cause them to want to be together again.
But all through this courtship process, usually very terrible qualities are surpressed or in some cases, one sees what they want to see.
Thus, all the questions about prospective partners are stupud.
You have to be there and see for yourself if you are attracted to the person you are dating. You will never know how they are going to treat you after some years. Unless they have some kind of machines that can look into the future.
It is actually more important imo for singles to focus on being successful in marriage than to focus on the ‘chase’. The problem is that the
‘chase’ is more fun, and imo somewhat addicting.
Peace all Holy Brothers and Sisters,
Steves
the big problem is that most people look solely (or too greatly) for that spark. They have to be “in love” – like they see in the movies. But hell if I know any married couples that are currently “in love”. Yes, they love eachother tremendously and can not imagine not being without their partner. But that is very different than the sparks. Too often, people reject an opportunity becuase those necessary “sparks” are absent at first meeting – even though the person may be a wonderful, if not perfect, partner for them.
The past is the past. I was just writing something similar about this on my blog. It justtakes one person to make someone want to the perfect mate. All those mistakes and fooling around and whatever would be forgottenabout. Selective honesty is the best way to . People say so often that they canhandle the truth but, in practice, they really can’t
Moxie
http://www.MoxieintheCity.net
I wish I could say I wrote the post, but my friend Pobody’s Nerfect (fitting, eh?) did. I am an accountant, though, so… HMPH.
As I said there, my own opinion on the matter (which many seemed to agree with to varying degrees) is that a person must be completely honest about it, but can choose to wait until they feel comfortable enough to reveal an issue. This shouldn’t be “too early” (“Hey, I’ve suffered from depression for 8 years!” doesn’t fly well on a first date I’d imagine) or “too late” (when the person almost feels ‘stuck’ because they’re so deep into the relationship).
Chutzpah had a great point about trusting friends. At least until someone keeps setting you up with nightmares, you should trust that your friends have your best interests in mind. Granted, I think that “why do you think it’s a good idea?” is a fair question, but an interrogation is not necessary.
Actually is right about “sparks” (or “stars” as some friends call them). Too many people are looking to be swept off their feet – that’s simply not how life works.
As an aside, I think a number of people misunderstood the homosexuality/child abuse comment. I was noting a story where people wrongly withheld information that *should* have been disclosed – that a person was homosexual and fooled around with other teenage students while in yeshiva. That person ended up becoming a pedophile while hiding his issues from his wife and family for 15 years (and through 7 kids). In *that particular case*, they were connected. The fact that it was not disclosed led to serious problems later on.
I think there should be sparks between people who do get married. It doesn’t mean that there is a problem if not, but it could impact their relationship.
It depends of course, on how much they will ‘need’ each other. If they have many children then by nature, they are going to be taken up w/ the kids. If only 1 or 2 then they would have more time together.
But I think that the attraction has got to be there and strong. That is why ideally, people would work on any obscene problems that they have or pick up.
For men it is harder because their sex drive remains very strong for many years, whereas for women, it lessens in terms of frequency needs, but at least if there is that spark, at least there will be some frequency level. I only bring this up because I am told that in later years, many couples have sex only once per month. I suppose that is fine if that is what they both want, but what do you do, if one partner wants to make love, say twice a week, and the other is at the once per month level, how do you reconcile this disscrepancy???
I pretty much agree with Chutzpah and everybody else that name, rank, serial number, and why the friend thinks it’s a good idea is all that is necessary. There is one necessary caveat, though: it’s only applicable to an experienced and modern crowd, where the parties will have the time, experience, ability, and inclination to uncover lurking personal issues and deal with them on their own. For the younger, frummer, or yeshivish crowd, where three dates is a serious relationship and people routinely get engaged after a couple of months, the shadchan (less likely to be a friend) ought to disclose more (perhaps not up-front, but at some point) simply because the parties aren’t going to take the time to explore on their own, even if they are so equipped.
Just my $.02
For me personally, I never worried all that much about any of it. Afterall, it was a movie, drinks, dinner etc. If a friend knew the person, then the person couldn’t be all that bad for an hour or two. It has always been that simple for me.
One of the best blind dates I ever had lasted 8 hours. We knew almost nothing about each other. We had great conversations that afternoon because we wanted to learn what nobody had told us. He’s now Adorable Boyfriend. That was a very good hook up!
Ok, this cements my opinion that Rabbi’s should be held to a higher standard to “tell” than well-meaning friends.
My ex is getting married tomorrow to a woman who he is importing from England. She visited twice before and now, bingo, third date they are getting married. Here’s what bothers me ….the Rabbi that is marrying them is the Rabbi who tried to come to our house to speak with ex for marital counseling at my request and every time he came, ex managed to sneak out the basement exit. This same Rabbi knew that the ex made me wait over 2 years before giving me a Get. This same Rabbi knows that ex can’t handle or cope with illness of any kind and that if she or her child or future children should come down with anything minor or serious, he will not help out and might possibly leave her.
I suppose the reasoning is that a poor girl from a poor family and a child who lives in England will be better off here with Ex than alone where she is. So she gets the Prize, a green card and citizenship for her future offspring. He gets housekeeping and babysitting services and sex for two weeks out of the month. The Jewish community gets to say “Mazel Tov” …one less single and NOBODY, including the Rabbi who witnessed the entire break-up of our beautiful home, tells her all about his flaws. Good, he’s her problem now.
It’s good to see you back in action Chutzpah. Sorry to hear that your ex problem has been so unsatisfactorily resolved. This is a serious ongoing issue with many ‘spiritual counselors’ of all types. Dear Abby had a column on it a few weeks back too. It’s a problem in that the Rabbi may indeed get sued if he was entirely too honest (‘Don’t marry this Shlemiel/ Shmendrik!’ ), or if he provides information that may not be entirely true, or not currently ‘operational’. He was a lousy husband, got fired from work, gambled & drank to excess, but he’s ‘reformed’ his ways now. Who’s to say? So it’s often a no win situation. The Rabbi may know of some of his lesser flaws, you might know more of the serious one’s, and his new wife more familiar with a different newer set still. The Get situation is more serious, and for me that should be public knowledge, and does speak to his opinions & acts as a man & husband. I would think the rabbi would be well within his rights to tell the new bride that, if she had wanted to know.
So who knows if the new wife was told. But I mentioned men (& women) ‘outsourcing’ for brides & mates here before, and it’s getting to be a popular trend (once again). The Shmoe we know and are embarrassed by & for may look like a hero to others more unfamiliar with our culture & context. It is ever thus. But saying ‘He gets housekeeping and babysitting services and sex for two weeks out of the month’… certainly would be incentive enough for many guys of similar vintage to tie the knot. At base we are profoundly simple creatures. Still, among the most commonly cited reasons for both filing bankruptcy and the dissolution of marriage is chronic illness and the bills accruing from the same trauma. Many, many people can not cope with these challenges, and many folks remain divorced or unpaired & unmarried as a direct result. Cheers & Good Luck! ‘VJ’
Thanks for the Cheers VJ.
As Oscar the Grouch would say “one person’s treasure is someone else’s trash.” Oscar loved trash and now Mrs. Mailbride can too. As for me, I will never date or marry down again. They have to be “good on paper” the next time, not just “have a good heart”, because now I know that those without paper creditials won’t cut it in life either.
I was also able to use this as a good teaching lesson for my two daughters who were in shock when in he told them, since they knew he only met her two or three times. 1) never put yourself in a position where you have to marry someone to take care of you and your child like the new “live-in” 2) Don’t buy shoes without trying them on first… i.e. run a man around the block for a while to make sure you still feel comfortable with him . 3) Rabbis don’t look out for everyone’s best interests, they look out for what position will keep them employed by the community.
Onward towards my dreams,
Chutzpah
I agree that the less revealed before a blind date, the better. I don’t want to know if you think s/he’s boring (or balding or small-breasted or overweight or whatever). Maybe I’ll think s/he’s boring; maybe I won’t. If you’re setting us up because you think I’m nice and you think s/he’s nice and you think we’ll have enough in common to make it through a first date, it’s good enough for me. Seriously.
What I’m not clear on is when, exactly, in a relationship, you talk about your sordid past. Clearly not the first date or the second date. But when? Third date do you casually mention that you’ve been on anti-depressants for the past nine years but are really quite fine? When do you tell the date that your parents are divorced? That someone abused you as a child? That you used to kill bugs for fun as a youngster? That you shoplifted regularly for six months as a teenager? Tell them too soon, they run away screaming before they get to know the real, reformed, post-therapy you. Tell them too late, and they feel lied to… How much does this stuff matter, and can you assume that it matters as much to someone else as it matters to you?
Anonymous, Stuff like that you don’t tell right away. Unless you think that you are still a petty thief, then you should work on that, that is, to stop doing that, but if this is in your past, u let sleeping dogs lay. You can and may want to mention these things as the relationship gets more serious.
This brings up an interesting point as to whether you keep any secrets to yourself or not.
What the Rabbi’s do, is that they, some of them, see the good side of things. they have this expression in Hebrew, Dan Likaf Sichut, to judge someone favorably. Not all Rabbi’s operate this way but many do.
So this Rabbi has come to believe that this man is cured of what was ailing him when he was a younger man. IMO, the woman from the U.K. should have been told the details as provides by Chutzpha. but I guess they want to experiment and try to make another Shidduch.
Altho I am also pessimistic as chutzpa is, Let us suspend judgement and see if this is a better Shidduch.
Alot of times the second marriage does not work out, but the couple stays together for fear of being a ‘2 time loser’.
OTOH, many divorced people have had time to understand what they did wrong, or simply that the person they married, changed drastically during the years of their marriage. In such a case, I would advise that they write down any red lines that cannot be crossed and present them to the potential mate, as things get very serious.
As you offered, if you e-mail in advance tonight’s event would be free. I’ll take you up on that .
Stella Manne
Here’s what I wrote for Moxie’s blog on the issue of honesty:
“Folks, This is why I like coming by. Eventually it all comes down to the great classical questions of human nature. People lie. They have been know to lie since recorded history. No nation, culture, religion, caste or class is immune from this incontrovertible fact. The greatest philosophers of the ages have been engaged with these questions. Today we can take some more clues from the sciences that have addressed such mysteries, Biology, psychology, physiology among these, (see the great Prof. Helen Fisher for a good run down here).
So guys lie. People lie. For obvious reasons. There’s often much to be gained from it. But what to do about it? Discover which lies are more meaningful to you. For most this means some leeway on their height & weight preferences. Plus or minus 2in. here, perhaps even 5-10 lbs. may be acceptable. Other lies are certainly more consequential. Still married? Most people will naturally have a problem with that. Currently in jail or on parole? Disclosure is a must. Broke? Yeah, even if it’s somewhat shameful, you really should ‘fess up. Ditto for any communicable diseases, ‘social’ or not. People may not like us for who we are, but if they’re to be friendly enough to date, mate and/or marry, they should eventually know the worst about you, and what might substantially harm them. That’s what’s fair & right, and it should be your ‘duty’ to do so. It does not always happen, but it should, for the true hope for any real romance or friendship. Still, many a quick and mutually satisfying schtupp has been based on solid sounding but facile tissues of sweet lies, and that’s a well recognized serviceable human tradition too. Cheers & Good Luck! ‘VJ'”
I thought I’d cross post it here. Cheers, VJ
[…] investigate this astonishing column at http://jdatersanonymous.com/?p=363 about […]