MetaChat - Which one would you date?

Brilliant, funny, angry. Are you kidding?

Because she needs me.

posted by chrismear 19 January | 20:50

I'm definitely leaning one way, but, just in case: What's she angry about?

posted by box 19 January | 20:54

Oh, without a DOUBT, the nice, active boring one. I married one of those, but I don't call him boring, I call him stable. I dated the brilliant, funny angry one once, and was miserable for it. They make better friends, as mates, they tend to suck.

posted by msali 19 January | 20:54

Nice, active, boring.

So I can be the brilliant, funny, and angry one.

I'm actually just angry and boring.

posted by BitterOldPunk 19 January | 20:57

The brilliant, funny, nice, active one.

posted by treepour 19 January | 21:00

Funny as in 'ha-ha', right?

posted by Ardiril 19 January | 21:05

I don't do angry anymore. I find that being around angry makes me unhappy.

posted by Claudia_SF 19 January | 21:13

Neither. I'm marrying the nice, loving, funny one.

But if I had to chose, I'd pick the nice one. Because I can't stand people who treat me or anyone else poorly.

posted by muddgirl 19 January | 21:14

Neither; I'd hold out for funny, nice, active, and interesting (brilliant is overrated, and -- like Claudia -- I don't do angry anymore). But if you must go with one or the other of these two, go with nice. Angry will eventually eclipse all else, and will probably make you feel like shit in the process.

posted by scody 19 January | 21:16

Depends on what kind of angry. Angry at idiots in grocery stores? Perfectly fine. Go for it.

Angry at crumbs left on the counter? Run away.

posted by mudpuppie 19 January | 21:18

Oh, and 'angry' as in "Every goddamn thing that anyone else does is meant to harm or anger or hamper me in some way"??

Good lord. Run away screaming.

posted by mudpuppie 19 January | 21:25

So, can we assume that, with only six adjectives between them, every word is deliberate, and intended to highlight the differences?

And, if so, does that mean the choice is between the mean, sedentary, interesting one and the stupid, unfunny, calm one? The antonyms probably aren't ideal, but you get my drift.

posted by box 19 January | 21:27

The anger is not violent, and maybe helps with the funny (ha-ha variety, though the "weird" part works too). The boring is SO boring conversationally, but very interesting as far as job/hobbies.

Gah! I can believe that neither is the right answer. It just seems so lucky to have a choice.

posted by unknowncommand 19 January | 21:27

box = yes! except not mean, just easily frustrated.

posted by unknowncommand 19 January | 21:28

Boring is the cardinal sin as far as I am concerned....I can deal with almost anything except boring.

posted by bunnyfire 19 January | 21:31

Well... I guess I'M easily frustrated...

posted by muddgirl 19 January | 21:31

If this is a real-world situation, isn't it possible to go out on a date (or two) with each to see where the chemistry is? It doesn't have to be an exercise on paper.

posted by mudpuppie 19 January | 21:32

It just seems so lucky to have a choice.

Well, in a way. But you're posing it like a choice between two not-great options; the fact that you have a choice, rather than being limited to one, doesn't automatically render not-great into great.

It's like being given a choice between lima beans and carrots, when what you want is sweet potatoes. The fact of getting to choose between the two might be nicer than being served one or the other without any say in the matter, but it still doesn't make either lima beans or carrots as tasty as sweet potatoes.

Now I'm hungry. And yeah, as mudpup says: why not go out with both and see how it goes? Why does it have to be one or the other at this point?

posted by scody 19 January | 21:45

this thread is useless without pictures

posted by pieisexactlythree 19 January | 21:46

Dates have been had (in two different timesets). Proclamations of love received, both recently. Both are cute, only have pics for one, though, so probably not that helpful ;) . I guess that I feel like I should give one of them more of a shot? Just in case? But maybe not. At any rate, thanks for the advice, y'all; it's helpful.

posted by unknowncommand 19 January | 22:02

Wait, so they both love you? And you lean towards one (but haven't told us which)?

That's a totally different scenario.

Come clean, dude.

posted by mudpuppie 19 January | 22:08

Lima beans and carrots are both definitely better than sweet potatoes. Ewww.

posted by netbros 19 January | 22:14

Proclamations of love received, both recently.

For real? I mean, they've both actually told you that they're in love with you? How many dates have you actually been on with either of them? And who are you actually leaning toward?

And more importantly -- much more important than any adjectives used to describe them, or how cute they are -- how do you feelm both about either one of them, and about yourself when you spend time with them? Do you enjoy yourself with either of them? Do you look forward to spending time with either or them? Do you have a sense of consideration for either of them, and do you feel the same in return?

Seriously, those are the meaningful factors involved in making a good decision, not whether "angry but funny" trumps "boring but nice" according to people on Metachat.

posted by scody 19 January | 22:16

Oh, I don't lean toward either, generally speaking. Or actually I lean toward both? Depends on the time of the day, or what particular aspect I'm considering, etc.etc. I feel like I should give one of them a shot, but don't know which one, or what factors I should be considering. I mesh with each in different ways. Maybe the thread sounds like the lesser of two evils, but I don't think that's the case. It's more a result of knowing them both well and long enough to be able to look at it more objectively. It's also why it doesn't have that "swept off your feet" feel about it. I'm not sure how much I value being swept off my feet anymore. A different topic!

posted by unknowncommand 19 January | 22:18

I'm not giving MetaChat free reign with my love life, though. I'm only being flip because I'm home alone on a Saturday night (ironically enough), drinking beer and chatting. Just curious how other people approach it.

posted by unknowncommand 19 January | 22:24

Ah-ha.

I'm more and more convinced that the answer to the original question is 'Neither.' And not because neither of them is worth it, but because you're not into either.

Spare yourself, and them, and keep searching. Have fun with them, if you can, but not at the expense of breaking anyone's heart.

posted by mudpuppie 19 January | 22:24

I'd figure out which one I felt easy around, which one I looked forward to seeing even when I'd had a long, hard day.

In my case, that probably wouldn't be the angry one. I wore out my youth on the angry ones, and I don't want that in my life anymore.

If the answer was "neither," then that would be my answer.

posted by Elsa 19 January | 22:44

Seconding mudpuppie, totally. They're both into you in a way that you're not into either of them, and given that you already know them both fairly well, that's just an imbalance of interest/affection/attraction that sounds unlikely to be overcome. In the long run, that's more likely to be a recipe for heartbreak than for a gradually evolving happy relationship (and I'm speaking from experience on that score).

So I think in this specific case, the question of "do I even value being swept off my feet anymore?" is actually a red herring (though, of course, a valid topic for discussion in a greater sense). Moving forward in a relationship with either woman at this point is more likely to be an exercise in stringing her along because you say you feel like you "should" give one of them a shot. ("Should" is a kind of judgment/warning word to me, anyway -- it signifies that you feel driven more by obligation or expectation rather than your own interests or feelings.)

posted by scody 19 January | 22:46

I go with the scody take on things. You need more time. If they're real and worth it, you'll have all the time you need.

posted by Miko 20 January | 00:16

The one with whom I'd want to spend the rest of my life.

posted by brujita 20 January | 01:49

The angry one, but I wouldn't marry him again.*

* this comment refers to a discontinued edition of Husband

But really? I'd be clearing the boards for the incredibly handsome, shockingly nice, brilliant, funny, sweet, adorable, kind, generous one.*

* this comment refers to the current and final edition of Husband

posted by taz 20 January | 02:23

OK, I just realized I'm the mean, lazy, interesting one. But, I think in the case of MuddDude and I, there was mutual attraction that let him gloss over my bad qualities.

If there's no attraction, I don't see the point of stringing one of them along.

posted by muddgirl 20 January | 08:34

Brilliant Funny Angry. That's what I married. Best choice for me.

posted by rainbaby 20 January | 08:36

Heh, taz--I'm stealing your discontinued/final edition labels for husbands.

My ex-husband (twelve freakin' years!) is angry, has potential to be brilliant, is often funny, and always lazy (too busy being angry that the world doesn't give him everything like his parents have given him.) My boyfriend occupies the other end of the spectrum: brilliant, funny, nice, active, and exciting in every sense of the word. He and I want him to be "Final Edition of Husband (Gold)." We're waiting for the patch that upgrades me from University Student to Wife 2.0 Deluxe.

Angry gets boring. Still, one could date both and see how the chemistry works out. It's just dating, right? Isn't dating about not being exclusive?

posted by bonobo 20 January | 10:11

I think my choice is obvious. : )

posted by Pips 21 January | 11:24

19 January 2008