We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
background check
pa_jorg
Posts: 4,404 Member
I was listening to the radio on my morning commute and I thought the conversation might make an interesting topic for the Peeps. The DJ's were discussing the situation of a friend who broke up with a woman after about a 6 week relationship only because she told him that she did a background check on him. It wasn't clear if the woman had just googled him or had done a an official 'background check' with credit info, etc. too. Anyway, all the married DJ's said they thought it made sense in this day and age of dating...the one confirmed bachelor was really, really pissed though. His point was that anyone who would bother looking up info less than 6 weeks in will be snooping and spying later on in a relationship. I have my own thoughts on the topic, but was curious to hear what the Peeps had to say about this!
0
Replies
-
I'll admit that I always creep people's criminal records.
Checking jnto someone's background records doesn't top the worst offenses to me. But I am a creeper by nature so of course it wouldn't.0 -
Background check is a huge turnoff, and no I don't have a criminal record.
HOWEVER, if someone who you are with is involved in some behavior that you feel you would need a background check, (and it would have to be fairly extreme, like shoplifting, breaking the law (aside from certain drug use)) then I could understand it.
Just to randomly background check someone is ridiculous.
(I am also assuming a criminal background check, not sure if that is the correct assumption.)
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)0 -
I'd prefer the person I'm dating to trust that I'm giving them the truth about my past and background instead of snooping around. Trust in a relationship is huge, and I see a reason for making sure they aren't lying and see if anything back there is fishy, but I feel if a person I am dating doesn't trust me enough to just ask, then it's doomed for the future.0
-
In a world where many relationships start via completely impersonal, non-real-life-community settings, removing many of the implicit 'safety checks' that existed in the past, checking out the criminal record of someone you can see yourself developing a longer-term relationship with seems to me like basic common sense, and indicates a healthy dose of realism and self-preservation. I also can't see that it means that someone would "snoop(..) and spy" later on in a relationship. Looking up what's on the public record of a relative stranger is hardly the same as stealing passwords and looking through a partner's emails/phone message/filing cabinets etc. How old was this "confirmed bachelor"?0
-
I think it should also be noted that a background check differs from doing Google search strings on a person. Things that can be found on Google searches can also be found on formalized background checks, depending on the individual.0
-
For me relationships are built on trust, and doing a background check whilst in a relationship is a clear breach of this.
I actually wouldn't be as bothered if they checked before dating someone to decide if should or not, but my opinion is as soon as you are in a relationship with me then ask me if you want to know anything about my past. Doing a search after 6 weeks is totally out of order as far as I'm concerned.0 -
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a friend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship with you.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.0 -
Background check is a huge turnoff, and no I don't have a criminal record.
HOWEVER, if someone who you are with is involved in some behavior that you feel you would need a background check, (and it would have to be fairly extreme, like shoplifting, breaking the law (aside from certain drug use)) then I could understand it.
Just to randomly background check someone is ridiculous.
(I am also assuming a criminal background check, not sure if that is the correct assumption.)
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
^^^^ This. I would much rather a man ask me questions. If we got to a point where he requested a background check, we'd be done because that means there's a serious lack of trust. If he does something or displays enough signs where I think I need to look up his background, he's out the door.
My ex fiance jokingly ask to see my medical records (my tubes are tied). As he was joking, I didn't give them to him, but I'd have no problem showing that to a man if it eased his mind about that kind of situation. But, again, there's an element of trust there.0 -
I wouldn't know where to begin to do a background check on someone, so I wouldn't do it. However, I don't think there is anything wrong with it, especially when so many people are meeting online and there are so many people that have fake profiles, etc. If someone did a background check on me, I wouldn't be offended, but I would want to know what info they got---I have never been in any trouble, so I want to know what would come up :laugh:0
-
I've had several love interests state that they googled me. One went as far as a full credit check (she worked for a law firm and was somehow tied into credit monitoring services). I have nothing to hide so I didn't mint. That being said, I have found that those that mentioned the googling and including the one with the credit check, they tended to be more cynical and for some reason seemed to always be looking for things swept under the rug.
Perhaps it was me? Maybe they primed me by sharing that they had looked me up and I was somewhat sensitive? In either case, I don't care one way or the other. It's logical and it makes sense for people to protect themselves.0 -
It depends on the definition of 'background check'. Googling someone's name doesn't count as a background check in my opinion.
As soon as I find out a dates full name, I check property records, clerk of courts for civil and criminal filings, mugshots, etc. I live in an area that is very liberal when it comes to public records, so stuff like this is very easy to find. I have no problem in doing this.0 -
I can run one of the best background checks in the world if I wanted too. I have never run a background check on anyone I have ever dated. To me thats a totally invasion of their privacy. I prefer to believe people are being honest with me, plus I can spy a shady character at 30 paces lol.0
-
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a frriend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.
While I see your concern, the flip side of the coin is as follows.
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
That also sends off an "obsessive" vibe as well. Simply doesn't go well with me.
I don't have many "absolutes" in disqualifying behaviors, but if you are "crazy" (which in fairness ONE background check doesn't exactly make you crazy) that is on the road to disqualification.
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)0 -
I agree, the DJ's weren't certain the extent the woman went to in the situation discussed, so I guess that's an open ended debate for us Peeps.I think it should also be noted that a background check differs from doing Google search strings on a person. Things that can be found on Google searches can also be found on formalized background checks, depending on the individual.
I would say mid to late 40s. Oh and I just found it fascinating that the married DJ's thought nothing of it but the single dude was pissed. Just made me wonder what was up with that...or if it was just something where he as an individual has something to hide?How old was this "confirmed bachelor"?0 -
I do a google search .. but other than that .. nah. If you googled my ex husband you would find all of his DWI's .. which would be very informative for someone. lol0
-
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a frriend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.
While I see your concern, the flip side of the coin is as follows.
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
That also sends off an "obsessive" vibe as well. Simply doesn't go well with me.
I don't have many "absolutes" in disqualifying behaviors, but if you are "crazy" (which in fairness ONE background check doesn't exactly make you crazy) that is on the road to disqualification.
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)
Even if you feel you know someone is "crazy" or not....the most established pyschopaths are the ones that are the most charismatic
0 -
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)
I agree. Women have to follow your intuition. If you feel the creep vibe, avoid the background check and just drop him. If you're getting that vibe, there's a reason for it. There are plenty of other men out there and you owe him nothing.0 -
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a frriend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.
While I see your concern, the flip side of the coin is as follows.
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
That also sends off an "obsessive" vibe as well. Simply doesn't go well with me.
I don't have many "absolutes" in disqualifying behaviors, but if you are "crazy" (which in fairness ONE background check doesn't exactly make you crazy) that is on the road to disqualification.
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)
Even if you feel you know someone is "crazy" or not....the most established pyschopaths are the ones that are the most charismatic
They however happen to be a very tiny percentage of the population. Living in fear of that population seems a bit paranoid when in fact you could do other measures to keep yourself safe.0 -
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
But isn't that what people have always done - asked their community about the person they are potentially building a relationship with? Whether it is/was friends, a church congregation, work colleagues, a wider community - most people used to primarily date people within their own sphere - they had other people in common with whom to essentially do a 'background check' - ~"what do you think of so-and-so?", "Doesn't such-and-such play football on your Saturday team? He seems nice - do you know anything about him?", "XYZ's a friend of your sister's - can you ask her about him/her for me?". It's also pretty difficult for someone to pretend to be someone other than themselves when they're part of a community that knows them. The difference now is that people don't often have that sphere of reference, especially if they meet online. Google, online criminal record checks etc surely just replace that community-based check in the modern age?
Re. the trust issue - if I ran a basic check on someone and what they had told me matched up with what I found, I would be more inclined to trust them in future, not less.0 -
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a frriend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.
While I see your concern, the flip side of the coin is as follows.
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
That also sends off an "obsessive" vibe as well. Simply doesn't go well with me.
I don't have many "absolutes" in disqualifying behaviors, but if you are "crazy" (which in fairness ONE background check doesn't exactly make you crazy) that is on the road to disqualification.
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)
Even if you feel you know someone is "crazy" or not....the most established pyschopaths are the ones that are the most charismatic
They however happen to be a very tiny percentage of the population. Living in fear of that population seems a bit paranoid when in fact you could do other measures to keep yourself safe.
Zach, Back to the distinction between Googling someone (i.e. seeing public records) and a something more invasive... what's your take there?0 -
And, what happens when you run into the false report?
My brother had a job offer rescinded after a background check revealed drug charges. This man was only one year older than my brother, same city. Luckily, he was able to prove it was a different man, but what if that had been a woman running a background check? She probably would have bailed without asking.0 -
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)
I agree. Women have to follow your intuition. If you feel the creep vibe, avoid the background check and just drop him. If you're getting that vibe, there's a reason for it. There are plenty of other men out there and you owe him nothing.
Sure, but not all creeps are creepy. There are a fair few people who find themselves single after leaving spouses who must have been charming and nice-seeming enough to marry, who later turned out to be controlling or abusive, or to have another family in another state, or.... These things may or may not have shown up on a background check, but in the absence of a pool of people in common to check with, it's surely basic self-protection, and if it's information that's on public record, I can't really see how it's an invasion of privacy.
False reports are a problem, of course, but what's the incidence rate, do you think?0 -
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
But isn't that what people have always done - asked their community about the person they are potentially building a relationship with? Whether it is/was friends, a church congregation, work colleagues, a wider community - most people used to primarily date people within their own sphere - they had other people in common with whom to essentially do a 'background check' - ~"what do you think of so-and-so?", "Doesn't such-and-such play football on your Saturday team? He seems nice - do you know anything about him?", "XYZ's a friend of your sister's - can you ask her about him/her for me?". It's also pretty difficult for someone to pretend to be someone other than themselves when they're part of a community that knows them. The difference now is that people don't often have that sphere of reference, especially if they meet online. Google, online criminal record checks etc surely just replace that community-based check in the modern age?
Re. the trust issue - if I ran a basic check on someone and what they had told me matched up with what I found, I would be more inclined to trust them in future, not less.
While I see your point, the problem is it becomes a breech of trust.
Yes people do ask friends and neighbors, but I would assume they wouldn't always take what they say as gospel truth. They simply want another perspective to see if their intuition is correct. (Although in this scenario friends and neighbors may not be reliable in the online dating scene)
Plenty of people lie/exaggerate about others for all kinds of reasons. (Jealousy, maybe they get some sick pleasure in talking about rumors, whatever).
So once you take others word as biblical truth (don't yell at me for the reference) then they simply have a trust issue with the person they are with. Which goes back to the first point, if you are wanting a "relationship" that trust has to exist.
I mean even if you got some "bad opinions of a person" from other people *(not overwhelming, a couple here and there), I would imagine you would probably still give the guy a chance. To see for yourself if he is trustworthy.
I mean, why can't you just ask the individual if he has any criminal records? Hell! Even if a woman ASKED me first before running a background check, I would concede simply because I would respect the fact that she knew it was an invasion of privacy, or trust. (Also I have nothing to hide)
EDIT: Also yes credit history would be offensive to me as well, but I guess I am biased there since my credit is ****.0 -
Personally, I have no issue if someone Googles me but if they ran a full background check with credit, etc. I'd be concerned. There's a big difference between checking for a violent history (which is public record in most states so you'll find it with a Google search) and checking my credit history which is really invasive.0
-
I think if you are wanting a "relationship" trust to an extent has to be involved. (Of course this excludes certain red flag behavior)
EDIT: Also yes, if a woman who I was with did a background check on me, I wouldn't be wasting my time any longer.(Sorry that just screams "crazy" to me)
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a frriend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.
While I see your concern, the flip side of the coin is as follows.
SO I run into a woman, we will say online, and I meet her a few times. After just a few dates she tells me she ran a background check on me. This to me says, that she will never trust me. This says that at any time that woman can get information on me, with or without my permission, from a friend or another source, that she will do so.
That also sends off an "obsessive" vibe as well. Simply doesn't go well with me.
I don't have many "absolutes" in disqualifying behaviors, but if you are "crazy" (which in fairness ONE background check doesn't exactly make you crazy) that is on the road to disqualification.
I understand why a woman might be more cautious about going over to a man's house, for fear of something happening. However, you as a woman should be able, by a few dates, know if the guy is crazy by then. If there is any uncertainty, you shouldn't be going over to his place (alone). Maybe then if you are cautious, invite him to yours where you feel a bit safer (let people know someone is at your house, whatever you need to do to feel safe.)
Even if you feel you know someone is "crazy" or not....the most established pyschopaths are the ones that are the most charismatic
They however happen to be a very tiny percentage of the population. Living in fear of that population seems a bit paranoid when in fact you could do other measures to keep yourself safe.
Zach, Back to the distinction between Googling someone (i.e. seeing public records) and a something more invasive... what's your take there?
Googling I am not quite sure about. People generally concede to put themselves on the internet so I wouldn't see that as much as a breech of trust, versus a criminal background check.
EDIT: If you can simply "google" someones criminal history this is news to me, simply because I have never considered doing this. I am assuming it is a bit more of a hassle then just typing in someones name in a search bar.
Again in my opinion, I would respond more positively to both these scenarios if I was asked first.0 -
OK, so say you met someone online. After a few days/weeks of chatting, you agree to meet in person. Things go well, you both take basic safety precautions - meeting in public, letting a friend know where you'll be and who with. A few dates later, things are moving into potential relationship territory - maybe you've invited her to your house for dinner.
This woman doesn't know anything about you, beyond what you've told her. She has no sphere of reference - no community of people in common to check with to have a reasonable certainty she will be safe alone with you on your territory. The speed with which things are generally expected to move now (see the Courtship thread, among others), means she hasn't had that long to build and develop a trusting relationship with you.
Is it really that 'crazy' of her to use the resources she does have at her disposal to make sure that your name doesn't appear next to a history of violent, dangerous or abusive behaviour? It's no guarantee, of course, but a simple, basic check seems like common sense to me before putting oneself in a vulnerable position with someone you really don't know that well.
Like I say, especially in the case of someone from an online meeting, I would have no real issue with them doing a check before deciding whether to meet me, to be honest if it went badly I'd never know, but I would expect them to tell me that they had once they decided to meet me.
But to me the big breach of trust and deal breaker would be a search later on after dating/relationship had started in earnest.0 -
Googling I am not quite sure about. People generally concede to put themselves on the internet so I wouldn't see that as much as a breech of trust, versus a criminal background check.
EDIT: If you can simply "google" someones criminal history this is news to me, simply because I have never considered doing this. I am assuming it is a bit more of a hassle then just typing in someones name in a search bar.
Again in my opinion, I would respond more positively to both these scenarios if I was asked first.
I think anything criminal is public information, and usually printed in the police blotter of local newspapers. I assume that would make it very easy to find, right?0 -
Personally, I have no issue if someone Googles me but if they ran a full background check with credit, etc. I'd be concerned. There's a big difference between checking for a violent history (which is public record in most states so you'll find it with a Google search) and checking my credit history which is really invasive.
I agree with this wholeheartedly, and the former is what I'm talking about. Someone's credit history really isn't my business, or relevant to my personal safety. Knowing about a history of violence is relevant, and not something I'd be inclined to ask a potential date about, just on the off-chance...:noway:
Zach, I hear what you're saying about someone asking first - I can appreciate that preference. I wonder which would be more awkward though, in the early stages of a relationship: "By the way, I checked you out online (and you checked out OK, or I presumably wouldn't be here!)" or "By the way, do you mind if I check you out online? (to confirm that what you're telling me is true/you are who you say you are)"...:laugh: Honestly, I can't quite see why someone would tell their date they'd checked up on them online anyway! I suppose the latter approach might smoke out a few half-truths and potential problems, but neither's exactly conducive to a positive, pleasant conversation!0 -
Personally, I have no issue if someone Googles me but if they ran a full background check with credit, etc. I'd be concerned. There's a big difference between checking for a violent history (which is public record in most states so you'll find it with a Google search) and checking my credit history which is really invasive.
I agree with this wholeheartedly, and the former is what I'm talking about. Someone's credit history really isn't my business, or relevant to my personal safety. Knowing about a history of violence is relevant, and not something I'd be inclined to ask a potential date about, just on the off-chance...:noway:
Zach, I hear what you're saying about someone asking first - I can appreciate that preference. I wonder which would be more awkward though, in the early stages of a relationship: "By the way, I checked you out online (and you checked out OK, or I presumably wouldn't be here!)" or "By the way, do you mind if I check you out online? (to confirm that what you're telling me is true/you are who you say you are)"...:laugh: Honestly, I can't quite see why someone would tell their date they'd checked up on them online anyway! I suppose the latter approach might smoke out a few half-truths and potential problems, but neither's exactly conducive to a positive, pleasant conversation!
This is true, your best bet (in my specific scenario) would be to never tell me.
I cannot speak for all men however, but to me asking to check and explaining to me you just want to feel safe, that wouldn't come off as offensive. Also if we are enjoying each other's company it wouldn't be awkward to me as well. (Sadly I would be so impressed you were polite enough to ask first that if it was offensive at all, it wouldn't be at that point.)
Then again that is me.0 -
Most of the "pro background check" arguments don't stand the test of reality...
1) If I was a psychopath, I would be lying about my name and you wouldn't find me on Facebook. So you would not find anything about me. Otherwise you are not talking to a psychopath but an idiot.
Anyone who believes they will find something about a psychopath by a Google search (lolz... are we being serious here?) is clearly deluded.
Psychopaths are known to have some degree of intelligence...
2) For lesser crimes (i.e. small criminals/normal people who screwed up):
- Either the crime is confess-able and so the person will confess it (so... trust them maybe?) but could be waiting for the first date to explain (after all, it's hard enough to get dates and a good explanation happens in person).
- Either the person is trying to hide their "unconfess-able" crime, but didn't do their job properly. That person is an idiot. They will be less skilled at concealing/lying and you will spot that on the first date or quickly afterwards. So you will know soon enough. OK, Google would help in this case.
- Either there is a perfectly good explanation for the crime, but you will never find out about it because you "stalked" the person and got the first date cancelled.
3) For a non criminal:
Some have the mindset that this is a breach of trust (me, Zach). Often people with "morals". You might be missing on a good opportunity.
4) If anyone is lying about their name (at which point you won't find any information about them except fake information), they are either in just for sex or to cut you in small cubes.
So they will lie until they get what they want. Concretely, if someone is in to lie to you, you WON'T be able to find the truth (except if they are an idiot).
5) As Zach said, plenty of people lie and exaggerate about all kind of things. Most of my acquaintances will only see one aspect of my personality and will fill the blank with their imagination.
They are not a trustworthy source of information.
My point is:
You will never know, except if the person is an idiot - but you should be able to tell after a first date if they are.
So, just use your guts... And don't piss normal people off.
Just ask what you want to know rather than play a game of "google" detective and think you know anything about the person.
Let's call it what it is: a simple "convenience" and not "a matter of life and death".0
This discussion has been closed.