Questions about "dealbreakers" are a bit odd. Any woman (or man) is a package deal, with good features and bad.

What you might accept with one person, you may not with another - it all depends on what the rest of the person is like.

I am a woman that does not cook, luckily my husband does. But if he didn't, it wouldn't change my opinion of him. It's not like we would starve if neither of us cooked, we would just eat a lot of chicken nuggets and french fries or go out a lot.

No. I cook. Very well I might add.

Dealbreaker? Unlikely. But the reason why the "doesn't" would have to figure into the situation. "Just doesn't want to?" Wants to be treated like a "princess?" Dealbreaker.
Doesn't have a feel for cooking, never learned but is open to learning at least something? That's a good thing for some bonding experiences.

When I was young I was very insecure in my relationships because I didn't know how to cook very well, other than basic breakfast and lunch. I learned a lot from guys who cooked, and from other women.

Still, I wish I had dealt with the problem earlier than I did, so I'd have more confidence.

My first instinct is to say "of course not". However, it depends on what you mean by "doesn't cook". Why doesn't she cook? Is she a bad cook or is it something she doesn't like to do?

And how absolute is the "doesn't cook"? Is being in the kitchen worse than being in hell, or can she make herself sandwiches, microwave things, reheat takeout food, and thus not starve when whoever she lives with is not around to cook for both of them (assuming she lives with anyone)?

Also, if the person of the same or opposite sex who shares her living quarters, or significant other of some sort, is willing to handle food prep duties, will she reciprocate by doing the cleanup or other domestic chores?

I've always felt that real dealbreakers are things like criminal behavior, but I have to admit I'd have a hard time with a smoker. Cook or non-cook, meh. Feeding oneself isn't hard.

Before I got married I didn't know how to cook well. My husband did. However, since I got married (and lost my job) I started cooking better and enjoying it. Now I cook mostly. Wasn't a dealbreaker for him while we were dating.

When the wife and I got married back in the Mesozoic Era, I had been on my own for almost 12 years since joining the Navy. I had lived in an apartment and cooked for myself for quite a few of those years. She, on the other hand, had just graduated college, and wasn't quite as domestic as I was, yet. Wasn't a deal-breaker. Now, over a quarter of a century later, we're still together. I don't cook as much as I once did, but I still am pretty domestic!

Not being able to cook is not a deal breaker. I can cook, thanks for asking. If it works out that she doesn't like what/how I cook, she can pay for a cooking class or three.

Gregg cooks. I wash the dishes the next day.

Fair division of labor. Unless you're just feeding the dishwasher and hitting "start"... ;-)

Questions about "dealbreakers" are a bit odd.

No, there are dealbreakers. For instance, a woman who smokes with regularity is a total turn off. She may be perfect in ever way except that, and I would be sad that she's disqualified herself by lighting up.

Others: wannabe Princesses, domineering wenches, pretty much anyone who wants to shape me into something I'm not.

I cook, I enjoy it, I'm good at it. Not an issue, so long as she's willing to do the chores I'm not fond of/good at.

If there's an equitable division of labor, then household shit just doesn't enter into it.

If she nags, smokes, gets abusive, tries to alter my way of life? Those are deal breakers.

And Amy, I don't know what kind of dishwasher you have, but mine uses less water per load than it takes to fill my sink once. I just have to use two detergent tabs to overcome the ridiculously hard water we have here.

Not enough information.

She "hates" to cook. Presumably she's been eating to get old enough to write you and get into a LTR.

How?

I can think of some circumstances where it wouldn't bother me, and many more where it would.

[In full disclosure, I dated for [mumble mumble] a woman who assured me she could cook like a champ, having learned at her rural grandmother and japanese mother's knee.

The entire [mumble] we dated, she cooked for me, well, never. But she got really pissed when I joked about it. (After [mumble] number of years. She'd occasionally cook somethnig for herself, but the only thing she tried to cook around me was a pumpkin pie, bought canned pie mix, not pumpkin, did the recipie wrong, proceeded to cry for 3 hours while I took the other (last can in the store, why I grabbed it) and put that in a pie shell and cooked it.)]

There were a lotta reasons I dumped her. The cooking was toward the bottom - not totally not-a-factor - but it wasn't that she couldn't cook. She couldn't be bothered to _cook for me_.

Hates to cook isn't really enough info. Hates it because it's a hassle, because it's not important, because you can... I dunno. that's simply not enough.

It often will be seen, without a good reason otherwise, as a lack of respect/care for the other person.
But it doesn't have to be a dealbreaker. Depends on the details and the rest of her personality and her SO.

You don't have the hot water fed to the dishwasher? That's crazy talk!

It is not a deal breaker if she doesn't cook, since I am an excellent cook, or so I've been told. Actually I find that women who don't cook, really appreciate a man who does.

When I lived with my ex, I did almost all the cooking. She wasn't confident and liked what I produced. Then repaid with blowjobs. Fair trade if you ask me. Guys, my advice - learn to cook and do it well! It's worth it.

If she doesn't cook, she's good for a roll in the hay but she's not relationship material.

But then, I'm one of those weird bad people who like feminine women, so my opinion is obviously Wrong and Sexist.

No. So long as she's hot.

heh, the latter years of my marriage were similar to Unix-Jedi... my ex is a very good cook. The kind of person who can add a pinch of something and make a dish better without a recipe.

But eventually she stopped cooking for me. Her and the kids? Yup, but even when I asked her to make enough to leave some leftovers. Nada.

In hindsight, I believe she wanted to fight about it, and was expecting I would make a fuss. But I just went back to cooking for myself. Which made her even more surly.

Is this a division of labor thing, a not a good cook thing, what is the deeper reason than "Hates" to cook.

I HATE to cook, but I'm not starving to death. It's NOT a deal breaker, BUT.

A woman that WOULD cook for me? D'ya have any idea how well maintained her car would be? How none of her doors would squeak, and how sharp all of her knives? Each of us has things that we can DO, and then things that we ENJOY doing and are GOOD at doing. You can get together and make stuff happen, even if you both hate it, if you are looking for things together.

It may not be a deal breaker, but a differentiator, yes.

Like anything else, you do stuff to show that you are different and BETTER than other potential mates. Regardless if it's a wiggle when she walk, and a giggle when she talk, mouthwatering meal or the ability to rub her feet after she's been wearing high heels all day...

It's positive pieces we bring to the table.

Importantly, the question is WHO IS HAVING THE PROBLEM? I've know some insecure types that lash out angrily against you for what they perceive as deficiencies within themselves, that you have never even mentioned.

Husband cooks better than me, so he generally does the cooking (especially when we entertain). I don't just wait around for him to cook for me, though. I'll order out and pick up something, or grab the premade stuff at Whole foods or Central Market, or grab a rotisseris chicken and throw together a salad. I TRY cooking sometimes, it just doesn't turn out as well as when he does it. I can do a few things in the crock pot, and I can bake some pretty amamzing desserts for special occasions. Anyway, we both work full time, but I do almost all of the cleaning and off-hours childcare.

I guess the point is, I don't EXPECT him to cook for me, and I make sure everyone is fed if he doesn't want to cook. I'm not popping a Lean Cusine in the microwave while asking, "So, what are you gonna have, then?"

Reminds me of an Arlo and Janis comic strip where it's Arlo's turn to cook, but, as is typical for him, IIRC, he simply orders take-out. Janis is very annoyed. Arlo says: "What's the difference? You don't have to do it!" Janis says: "It's the principle of the thing!"

To frugal types like myself, there's nothing laughable about Janis' line - after all, what she means is, "Think of all the money I save by
cooking, even though I sometimes hate doing it. Where would we be if we BOTH always ordered take-out?"

Bottom line: Even when TWO people who hate to cook marry, it's still not a good idea to eat nothing but butter-loaded take-out, if only because a frugal grocery shopper can spend 1/10 of what even cheap take-out costs, and during hard times (such as now) you never know when you're going to need the extra money.

Absolutely not! I cook fine enough for the both of us, and she can cook just fine as well, but I don't even consider that when thinking of all the things I love about my girl. Cumulatively, she works more hours than I do, as well as goes to school, so I am more than happy to bring my ten years of domestication from my previous marriage to bear in the pursuit of making her life as stress-free as possible.

My ex-husband'd refusal to cook was one of the many things that bothered me about him. I would work until 10 pm and then have to come home and make dinner because he refused to learn how to make the simplest things, like spaghetti with jarred sauce.

You don't need to be an Iron Chef to learn a few simple recipes to use in pinch when you have to cook.

This topic is a joke, right? My spouse of more than 30 years has rarely cooked. When first married: she shopped, ruined the day's food and then we ate at Wendy's. I explained that we had neither the time nor the money to pay for (and spend the prep time) and then eat out. My only mistake was when after too many years I showed some guests that I could cook.

She cooks food, I cook cuisine. Things even out.

But I think overall the willingness and ability to take care of yourself, the kids and the household is required of both partners since it gives piece of mind in case I get hit by a bus.

Washing dishes on the next day would be more of a dealbreaker for me, since I clean-as-I-go when cooking and also expect to use the kitchen after dinner, not to mention for breakfast.

...or Central Market.

Sigh. How I miss Central Market. My husband and I both cook. I am the type of person who thinks spending a day in the kitchen constitutes a relaxing day off. Still, I doubt it would be a deal-breaker. Attitude is what matters, as other posters have noted above. If not cooking is a manifestation of other forms of selfishness then it's a problem; otherwise, let's get takeout.

Amy, as an avid cook myself, I tend to be the one who does the majority of cooking in every relationship I've ever been in - and absolutely love it.

But, I'm also a BIG believer in self-sufficiency for women & men alike. When someone announces that they "can't cook" I'm more than a little skeptical if such a lack of skills is more a lifestyle choice to get others, be it their mom or whomever, to cook for them. Not altogether different from the male friend everyone has who always seems to have a back or neck or arm or wrist injury and is thus unavailable to help one move something. Or the guy who doesn't have a screwdriver in his home but thinks it's alright to get his friends to fix his computer or do some carpentry work for him at little to no cost.

Years ago I dated a beautiful green-eyed woman in Toronto. She announced to me on the 2nd date that she "would burn water if she tried making a cup of tea". Yeah, right. That was simply her announcing her feminist credentials from the get go. It got only worse from there, with later insistence that "womyn" was the correct spelling of the plural feminine gender.

So if a woman can't cook, is it a dealbreaker? Not necessarily but it may indeed be a signal that the hopes of an equitable power sharing in the relationship will never occur.

Everyone has their own dealbreakers.
To me it really matters what you mean by "Can't cook" I have a rather unsofisticated palate, so for someone to be be below my bad cook cut off into "can't cook" one would have to question their ability to do anything.
So it would be a deal breaker to me.

Golly, I hope not. A chore or two should never be a dealbreaker in a relationship. A dealbreaker should be something like personality traits (I could never be with someone who doesn't like superhero movies), responsibility (those who like to leech off of their mates, for example) or health things (like the people above who mentioned smoking) or moral issues (you've got to line up on things like birth control, alcohol, and so on).

FWIW, I'm one of those women who hate to cook. I dislike the whole process, I'm not very good at it, I've got no "food instincts" and I tend to think most recipes are too complex with way too many ingredients.

I cook about once a week, Hubby covers the rest. We're currently in debate about what constitutes a meal (Eades' followers would shudder to hear what winds up on our table regularly), but we're making an effort to come to compromises about the healthfulness of what we make (ie: I'm learning that take-out is not a good pass on my night to cook, he's learning not everything needs to come pre-made in the freezer aisle).

I am a great cook. Hubby has basic skills and we both prefer my cooking. Son can cook but prefers to warm up or assemble. Both hubby and son can do a bang up job on breakfast so if stuck with dinner duties will probably make french toast or something.

I consider being able to feed yourself and your kin a necessary skill. Any fool should be able to make pancakes or roast a chicken. Or make an omelette. Something more than opening a can or nuking a lean cuisine.

Deal breaker? Depends.

If we both have jobs? No problem.

If I work and she's home?

She'll learn.

How could a person leave something as important as food preparation to someone else?

Give me that pan, woman, and get out of my kitchen!

It's a dealbreaker if she's not willing to meaningfully contribute to the house in some fashion. Couples break things up as suits their interests, desires and needs.

My wife can cook some, but mostly I do the cooking; I'm better at it and enjoy it more. She does most of the laundry and more of the cleaning. What's critical is that each person feels that the other is doing his or her part.

Women who cant cook arent a deal breaker

Women who use words like 'womyn', 'cisgendered', and 'heteronormative' most definatly are

Well, clearly my husband doesn't think so...

However, I do occasionally cook -- I can scramble eggs, fry sausage, find a tasty sauce recipe for fish on the Internet, etc. etc. Up until now, though, our lives have not been terribly conducive to cooking -- we've both worked long hours and tended to get home late. Time spent cooking was time we couldn't spend relaxing together, so one of us (typically me) would usually pick something up (thankfully, we too live in a community with a Central Market) or we'd go out to dinner (and make a second meal of the leftovers the next day). Or we'd nuke a frozen PF Chang's bag meal. Etc.

Now, however, we have had babies (yes, plural -- but fewer than three, thankfully) and I will be staying home with them for a few months. So I do plan to cook at least somewhat. Anyone want to post a favorite recipe? I have cookbooks and family recipes but would love suggestions for tasty dishes that can be made in between taking care of the offspring.

On the larger point....I suspect a lot of guys feel the way that Robert does -- if the woman in question is working full-time, the cooking thing isn't as important, but if she wants to stay at home or work very little, they'd like home cooking as a compensation. That having been said, I have met very few guys who don't enjoy it when their SO cooks for them, unless she does a terrible job. All other things being equal, a woman who can cook has an advantage in the dating world. Not cooking or not being able to cook doesn't mean that you're sentenced to spinsterhood -- I wasn't! -- but it's often a disadvantage, at least if you're looking to get married and have kids.

I'm really good at chopping up vegetables, tossing them with spices and olive oil, and putting them into the oven along with chicken or fish. Does that count? I also make eggs, salad, and stir-fry. But anything that involves measuring ingredients or a recipe, I'm just not that interested in. It's not that I absolutely can't or won't do it, it's that it's not worth the time, $, and calories to me to make something that more than likely will turn out mediocre when the chicken-and-veggies option works just as well. Cooking beyond that level is more like a hobby, and having a hobby as a dealbreaker seems pretty silly to me. I do love when guys (or my parents!) cook for me though, and am more than happy to chop things, set the table, and wash the dishes afterwards.

SwissArmyD wrote:
A woman that WOULD cook for me? D'ya have any idea how well maintained her car would be? How none of her doors would squeak, and how sharp all of her knives?

This made me smile.

And I agree with everyone who says it's a division of labor issue. My boyfriend cooks, and I clean. Since he's been putting in longer hours, I've taken over some of the cooking -- and I usually keep it simple (spaghetti and meat sauce, stir fry, burgers, etc). The BF balances things out by cooking really delicious, complicated stuff on the days he does cook and makes big batches that last for several days.

If a guy ever said that my dislike of cooking was a deal-breaker for him, well, THAT would be a deal-breaker for me.

Not liking to cook or being able to cook only a few select things is fine, my own cooking repertoire is limited, though I try hard to make what I do cook very good (I make a mean pizza. I used to be able to cook rice perfectly, but I haven't done so good with that in my new place. I think I'll buy a rice cooker.)

However, the complete inability to cook could be a deal-breaker since you have to be pretty damn stupid not to be able to cook anything.

(On the other hand, my oldest sister is one of the worse cooks I've ever met and very smart. However, I suspect she could cook if she cared, but she simply doesn't.)

Does she also hate doing laundry? Housework? Yard work? Paperwork? Can she comfortably afford to pay someone else to do what she hates doing?

There is more to it than won't cook. If she dishes up nuggets, fries and soda in a cardboard cup everytime it is her turn to provide, dump her ass. If she doesn't have a lot of time and mixes it up with a rotisserie chicken, bag of salad and a crusty baguette, I'd give her a pass.

Still, fast food, already prepared frozen food, take out food and the like are usually not the healthiest choices. Plus you pay a premium for the convenience.

43 comments already? I have to say, I'd expect another adult to be able to feed themselves. Even if it means nuking bacon and making omelettes like Amy. It's fine if they prefer not to, so long as they don't simply assume I'm going to fill the gap. And so long as they don't live on McD's.

I'm a killer cook. I've gotten more than 1 (or 2 or 3) marriage proposals b/c of it. I also rock(ed, hey, with 4 kids in the house you WILL be interrupted if you take more than 10 mins even at midnight) in bed too. So that might have helped.

Here are two things that haven't yet been brought up:

-- It's fun as hell to cook together as a couple. I wouldn't want to be left alone to toil in the kitchen and I wouldn't do it to a significant other.

--Here's a worse deal-breaker: someone who claims they can cook really well, but their food tastes like shit. I wouldn't submit myself to a life of eating crap food.

Whistledick, I'd kill him with a spoon if he tried to cook with me. My man absolutely cannot kitchen dance. He's always in the way and cannot see or anticipate flow. My kitchen is pretty small. We are both happier with me cooking.

I am a vegetarian. Most men aren't. Ergo I had to learn to make fucking awesome veg meals.

I was the cook the majority of the time in my last two significant relationships (13 yrs & 2 1/2 yrs).

Both could cook -- but it wasn't their priority in life. I do everything from simple throw together meals and stir fries to a full up Thanksgiving dinner on my own.

I'm with the guys that says it isn't a deal breaker depending on the context. If she can't, or won't, even do a simple dinner I'm going to look askance at her. But I'm probably going to get out before I get that far in.

Like some others, I'm for a fair division of labor given the circumstances. I can do most household chores well including cooking, so I don't care what the division is.

Instructions are on the pizza box.

Hi LauraGr,

I hadn't heard the term, "kitchen dance", before. You're absolutely right. That would be more of a pain if they didn't get the "flow". The trick is that someone does the real cooking while the other does the chopping, grating, and other menial stuff. It's just about being together. It's nice to cook with wine also -- sometimes you can even put it in the food (Plagiarized from Erma Bombeck).

Being snuffed out by a spoon would be a rough way to go and would certainly represent a broken deal.

In our household helping the cook means playing with the dogs *elsewhere* so they are not underfoot. Open floor plan means this can be and usually is just a few feet away on the other side of the kitchen island. Good times.

If I ever feel the need for snuffing him with a spoon, I'll be certain to use the narrow end. It seems kinder somehow.

A 3 pound Lucy distraction is better than a 3 pound Lucy pancake.

We have 4 dogs. 2 large and 2 small. They live in hope that I shall become clumsy and drop the roast. It hasn't happened yet, but it might. Especially if they work together to distract, trip me and snag the main course.

Uhhhh.... I am teaching my SONS basic cooking skills.

This is something every adult should know how to do - whether they *like* to do it - or wind up doing it regularly - or not.

So: how does a young woman get to maturity without any basic kitchen skills?

-- It's fun as hell to cook together as a couple. I wouldn't want to be left alone to toil in the kitchen and I wouldn't do it to a significant other.

Posted by: whistleDick at January 6, 2012 5:39 PM

I don't cook almost ANYTHING time-consuming (as in more than 1.5 hours of hands-on time) unless someone's there to praise me for my efforts.

But I sure wouldn't enjoy being the only cook in the house. It would be as annoying as being the only cleaner, eventually. (I often dream of getting together with a bunch of people in some farmhouse and cooking something really elaborate, with lots of chopping.)

On a different note, in the 1983 book "Talking With Your Teenager - A book for parents" by Leni Zeiger Wildflower & Ruth Bell Alexander (Ruth Bell wrote "Changing Bodies, Changing Lives" for teens) the authors point out in one chapter that society's message to girls is (not verbatim) "learn to cook fabulous, gourmet meals for family and friends, but don't eat any of it yourself!"

Sounds a bit like torture, right? So, with that in mind, was it any surprise that as early as 1960, Peg Bracken wrote the "I Hate To Cook Book"?

But of COURSE we should all learn to take care of our own needs - both domestic and financial, no matter how much we might hate it. (It's easier if one focuses on DOING it than on how one feels about it!)

In 1994, in Ann Landers, "Dad in Anaheim" wrote in 12 tips for men looking for a mate. (He had four sons, two of whom divorced, and he said some signs that that would happen should have been obvious from the start.)

The first tip was: "Leave her alone (as in, don't date her) if she does not know whether hamburger comes from a cow or a pig."

And here's a list of "leave HIM alone" tips that followed:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1994-07-04/features/9407040158_1_dear-ann-landers-anaheim-dear-mom

(I'd post the first link as well, but that would get me drop-kicked. Both letters appear in Landers' last book, BTW.)

I am not a good cook - even managed to mess up top ramen in college in a non-obvious way (e.g. it was burnt - at least visible) to the point I couldn't stand to eat it. On the other hand, I am a good baker but don't do it often.

I think it would depend on the reason - and really that makes it more of a sign of another deal breaker. Does she expect to be taken out all the time? Is general problem of not wanting to do non-fun stuff?

If she is willing to go the just heat it route most of the time, that is fine with me.

for me, the hobby chef who always wants to these elaborate meals is as much a problem - My tastes are plain I guess.

It has been my experience that women under 45y/o don't normally cook beyond the heat type whether they can or not. E.g. an acquaintance does an amazing Thanksgiving and Christmas dinner - but that is all she cooks all year.

Amy: She hates cooking (woman who wrote me).

Interesting. I haven't had any girlfriend who was a gourmet cook (or a foodie) but neither have I ever been with one who hated cooking. I'm not a maestro in the kitchen but I'm on good terms with Herr Henckels, cast iron skillets and spices so if I ever did meet a woman who hates it, it wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me.

a_random_guy: Questions about "dealbreakers" are a bit odd.

I don't think it's odd that people have dealbreakers. It seems perfectly reasonable to me for people to have smoking, for example, as a dealbreaker. What I do find odd are some of the particular dealbreakers people have, like the woman I met a few years ago who said she'd never get involved with a man who wore t-shirts in public.

Thanks for rescuing my comment, Amy.

I hate cooking. It's annoying.

To each their own, of course, but it's so interesting to me that you find cooking to be "annoying." It certainly can require a lot of effort if you want to go that route, but it doesn't have to. For example, for breakfast today, I beat some eggs, half-and-half and vanilla with a fork (very simple), sliced some ciabatta and dipped it in the batter (also very easy), and put it in my cast iron skillet. Only took a few minutes to cook and then I topped it with blueberries and whipped cream. Délicieux!

I didn't do much cooking when I was younger but have really come to enjoy it later in life. I find it fun to create the things that I eat.

*

I thought some more about a_random_guy's comment. Yes, people are a package deal, and there will always be some parts of that package you don't care for but have to put up with, but the point of a dealbreaker is that it's something so off-putting that you aren't willing to accept it as part of the package.

a_random_guy, there are some things I will not accept in ANY package: smoking. drug use. alcohol abuse. pedophilia. history of sexual assault. compulsive lying. I could go on. Not even a billionaire sex god could do these things and me be with him. These are deal-breakers.

I'm really good at chopping up vegetables, tossing them with spices and olive oil, and putting them into the oven along with chicken or fish. Does that count? I also make eggs, salad, and stir-fry. But anything that involves measuring ingredients or a recipe, I'm just not that interested in.

That's pretty much what I do too, Shannon. Like you, I don't mind chopping and slicing but I don't like fussing around with measuring. My go-to items are salads and stir-frys (with omelettes and French toast for breakfast.) I never get tired of them.

i screw up kraft macaroni and cheese. honest, i do. i make really good pie. and cheesecake. i can do the necessities....and since i am overweight i am obviously not starving to death. but i eat a lot of cereal and a lot of deli meat sandwiches. and cook as little as possible, because even if i try really hard - it's edible. but it's not good. i hate everything about cooking, aside from the fact that i'm terrible at it. i hate grocery shopping, it overwhelms me. the whole menu-planning thing makes my brain shut down. i hate the trying to put it together into something that resembles food. and you know, i don't even enjoy eating it after all that, because it isn't good, just edible, and often barely. i don't mind clean up, though. i suppose i could do it if i really really tried. but you know, it makes me miserable, and so i just figure there are better ways to fill my belly and my time. someone i'm with can't cook either? or doesn't want to? well i guess we're gonna be regulars at the diner across the street!

My first girlfriend wanted me to cook for her, until I did.

In the kitchen I am clumsy and easily distracted.

I once dropped my KitchenAid mixer on a pergo floor (both were fine). In my lifetime, I've melted three teapots.

I have a limited sense of smell and I am over sensitive to the taste of salt, so I have no way of knowing how what I make will taste to someone else.

After years of trial and error I can, however, follow directions. I bake well (including casseroles/ lasagna), and can follow instructions that involve a crock pot (set it up and then ignore it for 8 hours - perfect!) or a pressure cooker (it's intense and demanding, for 15 minutes or less). There are a lot of ways to prepare healthful food that might not fit one's definition of cooking.

My partner and I have developed a division of labor that reflects our strengths and saves us from myself. She cooks, I bake. I do the research, she makes the purchase. She sharpens the knives, I try not to drop them on my feet.

Amy, one of my nephews, who grew up in the Bay Area, started working for In-N-Out as a counter person when he was in high school and worked his way up to being a tech guy for them. I'd never heard of the chain before he began working there. I saw Eric Schlosser, author of Fast Food Nation, speak a number of years ago and he said that In-N-Out is the only fast food place he'll patronize.

My ex-wife was a fantastic cook but demanded I do all the cleanup while she had the fun "creative" part of the meal. You know, since we're equal and all.

Turns out that was her view of my overall role in her marriage. It went downhill from there, in several directions at once.

Groucho did a song about an unattractive woman who could cook. "With the table between us, she looked just like Venus!".

The current squeeze can "cook" macaroni and cheese, frozen pizza, and breakfast cereal. Having grown up Mormon, she can also bake a mean pie and other "refreshments." Other than that, she is useless in the kitchen, so I do the vast majority of the cooking.

She more than makes up for her failings in the kitchen by being fantastic in the bedroom. Dealbreaker? No way. I wouldn't trade the exceedingly hot sex for a pot roast!

M4: I'm a killer cook.

So was Typhoid Mary.

Yeah, the mormon girls not ground into asexuals usually wind up very kinky