Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that there are too many red flags.

181 replies

Justnotsure1980 · 13/06/2018 16:58

New partner, great guy and friends for years.

Now we’re in a relationship and he’s opening up to me and he’s revealed;

Serious sexual fetish.
Mental ill health requiring medication.
Past relationships with men.
Offending behaviour in his childhood.

He’s a great guy, but AIBU to think that there are too many red flags to take this relationship forward?

OP posts:
TacoLover · 14/06/2018 10:31

BlondeSea read the posts I have made in this thread. I have said before that I think it's fine to have a preference. What I called biphobia was people constantly making assumptions about bisexual people as a group. Numerous posts on here have suggested that they are more likely to cheat, will just come out as gay, etc. I never once said having a preference is biphobic.

Birdsgottafly · 14/06/2018 11:18

I agree with the posters that say these aren't Red Flags. He has been honest about who he is and disclosed other aspects of his situation. red Flags are subtle hints about the person's character/attitude/treatment of Partners.

These can be Deal Breakers.

There isn't enough information on, his MH condition and how he manages that. If he is Bi Sexual (I know people who have Personality Disorders and have sex/relationships that aren't about sexual attraction).The offending and whether this is all interconnected, or "because of".

A person can be unsuccessfully medicated and that can cause a lot of behaviour that wouldn't have happened had it been.

Likewise a Child can have a traumatic event and go on a spiral that mirrors what this Man is describing.

There just isn't enough information. None of these things made you recoil in horror, so I think more questioning on your part is needed. If he wants a proper relationship with you, then he would be happy to help you to understand.

busybarbara · 14/06/2018 13:27

Wouldn't a bi be statistically more likely to cheat because they have twice the temptation?

TacoLover · 14/06/2018 13:44

Wouldn't a bi be statistically more likely to cheat because they have twice the temptation?

No they wouldn't. A cheater doesn't cheat because there are lots of attractive people of the sex they are attracted to. A cheater cheats because they are untrustworthy or unfaithful or have a lack of commitment to their partner. They don't cheat because of other attractive people. Bisexual people are no more likely to cheat and this is a very offensive generalisation that many people make.

ReanimatedSGB · 14/06/2018 13:46

Also, it's absolutely fine to refuse to date someone with a disability, because it will be too much hard work for you and restrict your lifestyle. No one is owed dates, sex or a relationship, and everyone has the right to reject people as potential for the most trivial of reasons.

expatinscotland · 14/06/2018 14:03

I agree with SGB, a person has the right to maintain any dealbreakers he/she wants.

Personally, I wouldn't consider a bi-sexual men having sex with another man whilst in a relationship with me as cheating, but that's just me and my standards, others feel differently and we all need to do what works for us.

busybarbara · 14/06/2018 14:38

everyone has the right to reject people as potential for the most trivial of reasons.

It's okay to discriminate on important things like this, but it is still discrimination.

DN4GeekinDerby · 14/06/2018 14:43

I can certainly see why some of those would be concering, I don't think you need all of them to be deal-breakers but I can see why some of them could be.

I wouldn't date someone with a pain-related fetish, I would find it difficult to remain attracted to someone who found my pain arousing and I'm not into dishing it out. I'm a total soft touch.

On mental illness and offending behaviours, it would depend on what we're talking about and, for the former, what they're using to cope with it just as I would for a physical disability. I've dated people with all of those, but I certainly see situations where it would be a deal-breaker.

Previous relationships with men doesn't mean he's currently into men. I know more than a few who've experimented one way or the other and don't anymore. I, personally, am only interested in relationships with bisexuals. I prefer partners who can understand that part of me and previous experience with straight men...yeah, they really don't hold my interest long, and while my experience with lesbians is mostly better, but I still prefer bisexuals. I do kinda find it funny how many think it's so much more competition or more likely to cheat (like a few billion people isn't enough) when so many people are pretty open about not dating bisexuals. I think people should have whatever and as many deal-breakers as they want, I'm proudly picky, but sometimes I wonder how some of this reputation bisexuals seem to have is maintained.

TuTru · 14/06/2018 14:48

Call it off I say xx

Butterflykissess · 14/06/2018 15:04

I would never be sexually attracted to a bisexual man, I find it a huge turn off and choose not to be intimate with any men who have slept with men. Is that biphobic to you?

this 100%. it would be an instant no for me.

expatinscotland · 14/06/2018 15:09

'It's okay to discriminate on important things like this, but it is still discrimination.'

No, it isn't. It's just attraction and what works for you in a relationship. Why on Earth would you want someone to date you who is not physically attracted to you? I'd rather not waste my time on someone who isn't really into me but just trying to be PC.

I had loads of dealbreakers: no men with kids, no men with small dicks, no hairy men, no short men, no unemployed men, no men who lived at home, no men who couldn't drive/didn't have a car . . .

ReanimatedSGB · 14/06/2018 15:11

Busybarbara: and in terms of personal relationships, discrimination is perfectly acceptable. People should treat others with kindness and courtesy regardless of their ethnic background, sexual orientation, able/disabled status, appearance, social class etc when in a public or professional context. of course, but discriminate all you like when it comes to who you want to date or be friends with. If you don't want to date football fans, Buddhists, fat people, unemployed people or vegetarians, that's totally up to you.

TacoLover · 14/06/2018 15:15

discriminate all you like when it comes to who you want to date or be friends with.

So to you it would be acceptable to not be friends with someone because they were black?

ReanimatedSGB · 14/06/2018 15:18

Some people are racists and do not want to socialise outside their ethnic group. I think such people are stupid and wrong but who they choose to be friends with is up to them; no one else's business.

ReanimatedSGB · 14/06/2018 15:19

Do you think that people should be coerced into dating someone who belongs to a group they are prejudiced against? Who by, and who would benefit?

Inkanta · 14/06/2018 15:23

Yes OP you are right to be cautious - all would be red flags to me.

expatinscotland · 14/06/2018 15:25

'So to you it would be acceptable to not be friends with someone because they were black?'

As s person of colour myself, I wouldn't want someone to associate with me because I was a token person of colour.

TacoLover · 14/06/2018 15:33

Do you think that people should be coerced into dating someone who belongs to a group they are prejudiced against? Who by, and who would benefit?
No, I don't, but the way you say it suggests that you think the prejudice itself is totally okay. You say you can 'discriminate all you like' when deciding who you want to be friends with. Why on earth would you encourage discrimination? The way you say 'it's totally up to you' as if discriminating when choosing friends is an acceptable option. It's not because that's saying discrimination against Buddhists, fat people, unemployed people is ok.

GetInMyNelly · 14/06/2018 15:35

The genuine close mindedness on here is shocking!!

I would never discriminate.

expatinscotland · 14/06/2018 15:35

'It's not because that's saying discrimination against Buddhists, fat people, unemployed people is ok.'

So people should be coerced or forced to associate or date people they don't want to then? That's somehow more acceptable? To have people be used to teach others a lesson about being PC and open-minded? I would prefer not to be used in such a fashion and would rather not waste my time being their token friend or date.

expatinscotland · 14/06/2018 15:37

'I would never discriminate.'

I'd rather not have sex with someone I'm not attracted to, so I had certain boundaries for me. Similarly, I'd rather not someone go out with me, date me or sleep with me just because it's an expression of how 'open-minded' they are. I'd prefer someone who is attracted to me and with whom I'm sexually compatible.

Inkanta · 14/06/2018 15:38

Basically I wouldn't court trouble. To date an x offender, and a man who's had sex with other men and also has mental issues. That's looking for trouble. No thanks.

TacoLover · 14/06/2018 15:43

So people should be coerced or forced to associate or date people they don't want to then? That's somehow more acceptable? To have people be used to teach others a lesson about being PC and open-minded? I would prefer not to be used in such a fashion and would rather not waste my time being their token friend or date.
Did you even read my post? I literally said in reply to the other poster that I don't agree with forcing someone to be friends with them or date them when they don't want to. The issue I had was that the poster made it seem as if it was okay to just discriminate against who you want to.

VetOnCall · 14/06/2018 15:53

I wouldn't call them all 'red flags' but all of those things would be deal breakers for me in a relationship individually let alone all together. Perhaps the childhood crime one could be overlooked if it was something very minor and he'd been squeaky clean ever since, but if it involved violence or causing harm or suffering to a person or animal then it would be an absolute no.

ReanimatedSGB · 14/06/2018 15:56

I think it's perfectly OK for people to choose who they will befriend, date or have sex with, whatever their reasons. While it's better, generally, for people to be open-minded and accepting of difference when it comes to socialising, individuals have the right to be as bigoted and narrowminded and stupid as they want, in their own time as long as they are not actively hurting others, eg by being obnoxious when they reject an offer of friendship/dating... . IE if A chooses to remove themselves from a social group rather than associate with [person who belongs to a class of people that A is prejudiced against] that's up to A. Yes, A is a dickhead but it's still up to A. However if A tries to persuade the rest of the group to reject someone on the grounds of that someone's ethnicity, religion, sexuality etc then that's not acceptable.