comment: >
  
  I would actually be happy if you're right
context: I’m confused on what the “two yes or no” rule is >
  
  Both partners must say yes, or it's a no.
  It can work in many cases. 
  It can also be used by a domineering controlling person to the detriment of their partner, IMO. >
  
  I’m gonna go ahead and agree with you then that seems dumb >
  
  So…you think you should just get a dog if your partner doesn’t like dogs?  That’s really not how relationships work. >
  
  No, I am saying if you don't like dogs, don't get involved with someone who loves them and already has them, and then unilaterally say no more.
  Huge difference. >
  
  or if you have them dont get involved with someone who doesnt like them in the first place >
  
  I had my dogs on my online dating profile and it's always been obvious they're a huge part of my life.
  So ...I think the burden of not dating me was on the secret dog haters, just saying. >
  
  At some point, they must have said or shown you that they dont like dogs, its your choice if you are ok with that and stay with them or if its a deal breaker and you break up >
  
  Please reread my comment. 
  What person who actively dislikes pets is going to initiate conversation in online dating with a person who openly displays their pets on their online dating profile?
  Anyone who ever started up a relationship with me knew what they were getting into.
  Yes, I did once have some momentary chagrin when someone I had chatted with for weeks suddenly canceled the first meeting because I had too many dogs. But he did us both a favor. >
  
  
  What person who actively dislikes pets is going to initiate conversation in online dating with a person who openly displays their pets on their online dating profile?
  
  Someone looking to smash that doesn't care if you have pets because they aren't planning on being around long enough to have to care. Someone who is controlling and thinks "eventually ill make her get rid of them so its not a problem" someone who likes some pets just not your pets and/or thought they did until they realized the reality of it. 
  Its really irrelevant why they would the point is once they show they arent into it you can make the decision for yourself if you want to be with them and accept they dont like your pets or if you want to leave (id personally pick my pets) >
  
  I don't think you're making the case you think you're making.
  They're pretending and faking with ulterior motives.
  I guess my policy of not being an easy smash worked in a sense. Very few dates ever met my dogs, because very few dates crossed my threshold to smash.
  My point remains.  If someone doesn't like pets, they shouldn't appease and manipulate and pretend in order to smash.
  That goes for pets, kids, financial status, whatever. Don't pretend to be okay with X only to manipulate someone into an easy smash. >
  
  What are we talking about?  Two yes and a no?  Is that like the two truths and a lie game? >
  
  Many relationship experts demand two yesses on some decisions, or else it's an automatic no.
  I'm saying that can be abused. >
  
  Downvote from me. Not really an unpopular opinion.