Why (Some) Women Might Consider Settling

Evan Marc Katz

  Pages:   1 2 3  

I got an email from my sister the other day. She was forwarding an article written by Lori Gottlieb for The Atlantic, called “Marry Him – The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough”. Actually, that’s not quite right. In fact, she was forwarding me a link to a gossip site called Jezebel, which was ripping the author for even posing the notion that settling was a reasonable idea. So first I read the criticism, then I read the article, then I read a post-article interview with Gottlieb, and then I watched Gottlieb defend herself on The Today Show.

It was very clear that Gottlieb was onto a hot-button issue. But why was she getting attacked from all angles? Why the seething vitriol at a single mother who suggests that it might be wiser to compromise at age 34 than to continue searching through a thinning talent pool at age 40? It was clear to me that the messenger was being shot for carrying a controversial message. But it wasn’t fully clear why. So I started talking with the very people who were upset about this piece – single women, 35-45. My clients.

They told me that the piece was offensive.

They told me that it speaks more about the author than it does of them.

They told me they were very happy being single and would sooner die alone than settle.

They told me that it’s unfair to single out women for “settling”. What about men?

Now, to be clear, I am very sympathetic to the plight of women looking for love. No, I’m not a woman, which inherently limits my understanding, but I am a dating coach who listens to the fears and complaints of women every single day. You’d be hard pressed to find a man more attuned to the frustrations of single women than I am. Yet from a coldly logical standpoint, I found Gottlieb’s argument virtually unassailable.

She didn’t say settling was ideal. She wasn’t saying that you should "settle" to the point that you’re miserable. She wasn’t saying that you couldn’t possibly be happy alone. She even admits that “talking about settling in a positive light makes people profoundly uncomfortable”. So what was she saying? To paraphrase:

If you DO want that traditional American dream of husband + house + kids who look like you, then your odds of achieving it are greater if you “settle” in your early 30’s.

If you want to have your own biological children with a quality man, your options are considerably greater when you’re 32 than when you’re 42. And if that’s the case, it might behoove you to settle for a “good” guy when you’re younger, rather than hold out for an ideal guy when there are fewer quality options available.

I’m not sure what there is to argue with. I mean, you can make the argument that you’re perfectly happy being single. Great. Stay single. You can make the argument that you’d be suicidal if you were to marry the “wrong” guy. Certainly, you shouldn’t marry under those circumstances. But if you DO want that traditional American dream of husband + house + kids who look like you, then your odds of achieving it are greater if you “settle” in your early 30’s.

Here’s why:…

Print Friendly

Continued on next page >>

Pages:   1 2 3  next >>

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

Related Posts:

1. Don’t Judge a Book By Its Cover – In Defense of “Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough” by Lori Gottlieb
2. Why Do Women in Their 30s Not Want to Date Men in Their 40s?
3. What Do Guys In Their 20’s Want With Women In Their 40’s?
4. What’s the Difference Between Settling and Compromising?
5. Why Are Only-Child Women (And Men) So Self-Centered?

Why He Disappeared is the smart, strong, successful woman's guide to understanding men. If you want to learn how men think, and rediscover how to have meaningful relationships - all from a man's point of view - Why He Disappeared is the perfect place to start.

182 Comments »Filed Under Favorites, Sex & Relationship Advice

182 Responses to “Why (Some) Women Might Consider Settling”

1. Dating Advice - Anything ‘08 : Blog Archive : Why (Some) Women Might Consider Settling 1

   [...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptI got an email from my sister the other day. She was forwarding an article written by Lori Gottlieb for The Atlantic, called Marry Him The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough. Actually, that’s… [[ This is a content summary only. … [...]

2. Markus 2

   Bravo Evan. Bravo. A couple of things. First, your last paragraph and a half is gold. I was married for 10 years. My grandparents died together (not literally) and my parents just celebrated 40 years. It’s unfair to expect ANYONE to give you that buzz for the rest of your life. You need to be happy with the comfy kind of love that comes after. More, I think the perpetuation of the myth that you should ALWAYS have that buzz is partly behind the rise in female infidelity.

   Second, I frequent a site called survivinginfidelity.com and it’s my experience that as women get older they feel more independent than men do. I feel that this may partly be due to female rise in testosterone w/ age and corresponding male decline in same w/ age. Sorry to whip out my bachelors in science. Just a theory.

   Lastly, with everything you’ve written Evan I just feel that much more pathetic. I’m 38 and in peak physical condition. 6’1″, 200 lbs and I can even dress myself, cook and choose wine. Yet, I’ve been on match for more than 2 years with nothing more to show for it than some one night stands and month-long relationships that crash and burn. Negatives include, I already have 2 kids and their nights are unavailable, socially. Some emotional baggage and financial instability due to divorce/child support (excellent credit and bills get paid but, hey, month to month) and the inability/lack of desire to produce more children. Very frustrating. I really don’t want to be a 50 year old bachelor. : (

3. Selena 3

   Settling is a practical option. Many women and men settle. The problem with settling often comes down the road. Many people who settle find themselves on other message boards complaining about their mates in terms of sex, affectionate, communication, compromise, values, the list goes on and on. And you ask them, “But was s/he like this BEFORE you married?” Answer: “Well yes, to a degree. But I thought it would get better in time after we were married.”

   Well it didn’t and years after the bloom is off the settling relationship, what you have is at least one unhappy person who complains and complains, yet stays because the spouse is a good provider/good parent. And that might be the only reason.

   Settling as practical to get what you want? Sure. But you might want to talk to those people who settled a while AFTER they got the house and the kids and the SUV and see what they have to say then.

4. Selena 4

   Settling at 32 can feel like being trapped at 42. It’s a tradeoff.

5. Steve 5

   I think one of the reasons why women find the idea of “settling” so offensive is that when they were little girls their heads were filled with the “Knight In Shining Armour” BS and their heads were filled with the BS that their weddings would be the end all,be all, romantic adventures of their lives.

   They have been waiting for that ideal all of their lives. For many it keeps them going.

   The idea of giving all of that is not going to be happy one.

6. Steve 6

   To be clear

   “Settling”, I think, in this context” means accepting accepting “Mr. Human” instead of holding out for “Mr. Knight In Shining Armor”.

   “Settling” does not mean marrying “Mr. Wrong” or even “Mr. Poor Fit”

7. verbosity 7

   Evan’s points are great. He’s right about compromising and the challenges of ‘having it all.’ For both sexes, I might add.

   Ah, practicality. Selena makes some good points for & against both sexes. Here is what I’ve found, anectedotally (spelling?) speaking. And no, I’m not critiquing her post, just taking it a step further.

   She wrote, “Well it didn’t and years after the bloom is off the settling relationship, what you have is at least one unhappy person who complains and complains, yet stays because the spouse is a good provider/good parent. And that might be the only reason.

   Settling as practical to get what you want? Sure. But you might want to talk to those people who settled a while AFTER they got the house and the kids and the SUV and see what they have to say then.”

   No kidding. She’s right. However, it’s pretty easy to divorce now, and no one needs to be ‘at fault.’ Since the thrust of the article is about having children, let’s look at that.

   If she ‘settles,’ she’s already dissatisfied on some level, as noted by Selena. However, let’s look a little at what happens if she’s a stay-at-home mom. This isn’t to debate the merits or supposed benefits to the kids. It’s about her dissatisfaction because she settled.

   Husband has risks he shoulders when accepting 100% of the financial burden to allow his wife to stay at home. I agree that staying home with children is backbreaking and difficult work. This changes when the kids go to school from 8-3, or 7 hours. After a few years of hard work at home, many wives may feel entitled to “kick back” and take it easy. What’s husband done this entire time? He’s worked to provide the funds for the household, has done his share of housework, and is still working just as hard to support the family once the kids are in school. His workload has not diminished, and it may have even increased as her expectations rise. He is rarely afforded the same option to scale back his daytime efforts.

   What motivation does wife have to return to work? Very little. Husband’s income has been enough to live on. Otherwise, she would have been working to make ends meet out of need. Unless tight finances dictate that she must return to work, the husband really has little say in this matter. Wife usually has many different ‘reasons’ she cannot work, despite having little to do from 8am-3pm. Here are some of the most popular.

   “I do the housework”
   Hooey. This was valid in the 30′s, before dishwashers, washers, dryers, microwaves, and refrigerators were in every home. In the 30′s women did have too wash the clothes (incl. cloth diapers, not disposables like today) by hand on a washboard. Ouch! Today, throw them in a Maytag. Run a vacuum – 1 hour/week. It is easy to exaggerate the labours of daily housework. Yet how long does it take to throw clothes or dishes into the washer, and remove them later? Grocery shopping used to be done daily, as not everyone had refrigerators to store food. Food was prepared from scratch daily. That doesn’t exist today. A decent meal can be prepared in under an hour, not to mention the proliferation of take-out (Chipotle, anyone?). Does all of this add up to 7 hours a day? The lie that housework is hard, time-consuming drudgery is no longer as persuasive as it may have been in the past, because in an age of later marriage, many men have done their own cooking, cleaning, and general housekeeping and know that it doesn’t take that much effort or time. Humourously, not every stay-at-home-wife even performs all of these duties.

   “I can’t find a job”
   She has been out of work too long, and therefore is unable to find a job. This may be true, but many men do not consider this risk when they agree to support her while she “temporarily” stops working. Hopefully now they will, and can make a more informed decision. Many wives may use this as a convenient scapegoat to stop looking for any job at all.

   “It doesn’t pay for me to work”
   In the short run, the expenses of returning to work such as gas, lunch, clothes and day care may not make it worthwhile for her to return to the workforce. This may be true, but does that justify her playing tennis, drinking lattes and catching up with her friends while her husband toils away? Many couples may be too shortsighted to thoroughly and comprehensively think through this issue. Initially, the cost to benefits ratio may not be ideal, but her returning to work will improve her job skills and network of contacts and over time the return on investment will improve. More so than strolling through the local mall every afternoon and window-shopping for new window treatments. Over time, as her career gets back on track, and she becomes qualified for better jobs, her salary should also improve.

   Ah, Divorce. I don’t like to bring it up, but you have to include it in the discussion since, if she’s ‘settled’ and dissatisfied, she will likely initiate a divorce. The divorce rate exceeds 50%, and of those, women initiate AT LEAST 70% of the divorces (see Discovery Health).

   Upon divorce, all assets accumulated during and prior to a marriage are subject to division. Divorce is a license to steal. It’s wealth redistribution. If the Wife has not worked in years, and has spent the intervening 5-10+ years shopping and lunching from 8am-3pm, she is entitled to half, or more, of everything Husband earned during the course of the marriage. Is this fair? How many people would ever agree to a job contract that stipulated that in the event of separation that one party would have to return 50% of the gross amount of everything in the pay packet? No one in his or her right mind would knowingly sign such an agreement. Yet Husbands agree to this insanity every time they marry.

   Imagine that in the spirit of generosity and kindness that you gave a beggar a hot meal. This is nice, no? Now imagine your reaction if that same beggar sues you in court. He is petitioning the judge to have you keep providing him with the food that you gave him willingly, freely, out of a big heart. The judge orders you to keep feeding the homeless man meals, indefinitely, forever, because he has become accustomed to eating those meals! This is categorically absurd, yet this happens to Husbands in divorce court every day. Instead of thanking you for paying her bills for all those years, what you get is the privilege of being legally forced to pay her bills forever!

   After having children, many women demand to quit working and stay home. Before the kids came along, many of these same women may have been in careers they hated, working long hours, and enduring long commutes. It is the man’s generosity and dedication to his own career that enables her to walk away from her own career. During a marriage, a man with a stay-at-home wife might work long and grueling hours in order to support her. He will pay the mortgage, the property tax, grocery bill, phone bill, cable bill, Internet bill and electric bill. He also pays for her car, gas money, clothes, and vacations.

   As one final slap in the face, the man may be punished for working hard enough to allow his wife to have the luxury of staying at home with the kids. As noted above, after the children are in school, the wife may enjoy a life of leisure and relaxation that is afforded to her by her man’s hard work. In the event of divorce, he will be legally obligated to support her for years or decades to come. Because she stopped working and led a life of leisure, the ex-husband is now responsible for supporting her, forever! History has a tendency of rewriting itself. Originally, a woman may have had a career that she may have hated, and was begging to leave. Women often “play” at work and career for a few years after University, and then when they near 30 or grow tired of the workplace they seek out a man to “take her away from all of this”, whatever “all of this” may be. In fact her desire to leave the world of work may have been her motivation to have kids in the first place. But now, in her eyes, and definitely her lawyers eyes, she “gave up” her career for her man and his kids. She is now “owed” all of her “lost income”. His gift of leisure and support to her has now become twisted and is viewed as her sacrifice! Another way in which the situation is turned against him is that he will be characterised as being threatened by her having her own career, and that he forced her to quit her “lucrative career” and stay home with the children. Her lawyer will now attempt to convince the judge that he wanted to “oppress” his wife and “keep her down”. Truthfully now, how many men do you personally know that are upset at having a wife that earns a good living? Many of these misleading stereotypes still run rampant in our society, and are routinely used to the woman’s advantage during a divorce. As a result of her not working, regardless of whether she was minding the home or not, she remains a financial liability.

   Generous, caring men who spoil their wives should certainly think twice about how this generosity can later be used against them. The phrase used in divorce court is “She has become accustomed to a certain lifestyle”. A husband’s reward for spoiling his wife today is the legal obligation to spoil her indefinitely, forever. Buy her a luxury car today, and you may be obligated to buy her luxury cars after she leaves you for another man! Yet, imagine a husband that became accustomed to eating a home cooked dinner, or regular conjugal visits. Now imagine the courts obligate the ex-wife to continue cooking for him and sharing her bed with him and his new girlfriend each night, despite being divorced! Inconceivable, but it happens the other way around every day!

   Ok. Apologies for being so long winded. But you get the point. She ‘settles’ for him to have kids. She gets dissatisfied. In the end, he ends up with modern indentured servitude. By the way, the same thing happens to him if he ‘settles’ and later wants out. The post sounds negative, but it’s a no-win system for men, generally speaking.

   It would seem best that men avoid women who are ‘settling’ for them. Now how to do so is the trick…

8. Steve 8

   I didn’t start out looking for younger women almost exclusively. I like good conversation. I also like someone that has the same cultural references that I have.

   I gave up on women my own age because

   - They are paranoid. Dates aren’t fun. They come with an
   agenda of questions designed to weed men out on indicators.
   I understand why they do this, but I want to have
   fun on a date, and enjoy someone’s company not be interviewed.
   have fun. These women are not as subtle as they think they are.

   - Low self esteem. Forcing a shy person into a conversation is
   no fun. At various parties I have been at it has been a LOT
   easier to break the ice with younger women. Not so with many
   of the older women I have come across. I have to work a lot
   longer and a lot harder to draw them out. I can get the vibe
   from them that they think of themselves as “expired produce”
   so why would a guy like me want to talk with them or maybe
   I will then get bored with them quickly. Not true, but if it is a lot
   easier to get someone else to warm up in a conversation that is
   the person I am going to talk to at a party.

9. Steve 9

   I read this great quote in a book last year

   “If you will settle for nothing less than perfection then that is exactly what you will get: nothing“

10. Alan 10

    Evan, kudos for a great post! I’m generally a fan of being open and cognizant of other points of view and I think you hit this one dead on.

    In response to Selena, I view those as the balance to the equation, or caveats if you will. Settling is a trade off, a gamble in many ways.

    Two (possibly relevant) quotes: The problem with getting what you want is getting what you once wanted. (Don’t remember where that’s from.) “It’s not having what you want, it’s wanting what you’ve got.” Sheryl Crow (“Soak Up The Sun”)

11. E.S. 11

    Evan, Gottlieb isn’t just saying “settle for a guy who’s less than perfect.” She’s saying “settle for a guy you don’t love and don’t find attractive before your ovaries wither or you have to be a single mom.” I mean, she’s advocating being willing to marry and have babies with a man whose touch repulses you — and she’s saying that being repulsed should be Good Enough. Isn’t that a bit too much of a sacrifice just to get a ring and a Diaper Genie?

12. Angela Crisp 12

    Firs, Evan, my dear, I applaud you for this brave piece, however, it does seem to me to be misguided on several points. As a 42 year old, unmarried woman, I don’t feel I should rip the author, but I must admit I do feel pity for her, and anyone who takes her advice. The idea I should settle for a problematic man for biological purposes is, on its face, rather cold. I can, in fact, give birth through my mid fifties to satisfy my own biological needs. If men prefer vigorous younger women to conceive with, I also seek a vigorous man for a sperm donor. But if in seeking a man, I am also seeking a companion, and if the chemistry is not strong enough, the relationship will end at some point, and the children will likely be my responsibility alone. The large number of single mothers in the US I think attests in the support of this theory. Women don’t seek ideals, we seek real people, and practical situations. Recommending women settle for what they don’t really, truly desire is a recipe for unhappiness. Now, I recognize that sometimes everyone needs to adjust what they desire, but I would hope the passion for the new desire would be just as great as for the old desire. I happen to adore men, no doubt a product of my past affairs, but adore them I do. However, the idea I should “settle” for something less than I desire is disturbing considering my passion for the men in question. I notice that this recommendation is made only to women, not to men, although you make it plain that previous objection won’t be addressed in your column. I find that interesting. Women, for biological satisfaction, should deny themselves emotional satisfaction. Yet, it is the emotion that will keep people together to raise the biological offspring, and it that’s not present, the relationship will end, if for no other reason than the stress of raising the offspring. Would it not be better to let the women have their biological offspring even if an ideal or good man is not present? Then if the man truly wants to stay, he can of his own free will? And if a woman tries with a man to have children she will remain involved with, shouldn’t her biological and emotional choice be hers? It is not like women don’t raise children on their own in the US. And if children are not her goal, should she not have the same set of choices? As for being arrogant questioning our elders — if no questions are allowed, however respectfully they may be made, won’t that cut off all advancement, all progress, even between generations? In what way does wanting and waiting for a compatible man we are passionate about question our elders? You column raises more questions than it provides answers aside for an injunction for women to settle for someone they might not really desire in the long run. Is looking for a good man really that painful and detrimental for women? We are, after all, told we are natural shoppers. I realize my point of view resonates with old feminist ideas that have been lost or refuted by US culture, and I don’t want to imply any threat to you. But your column provides a very old fashion solution to a complex modern problem. I admire your bravery and courage in addressing these issues at all, and would hope you can find in my words a few things to consider in the future. Thank you.

13. Angela Crisp 13

    To Steve: I think it is wonderful you have found a group that seems right for you to focus on. I date mostly younger men for the same reasons you date younger women. Older guys do have more baggage, just as older women do. I am the lucky one, I lost my baggage at the airport and never bothered to track it back down, lol. Do I need that old tooth brush and those worn out sneakers? No. I don’t think you do either. It is about fun, and friendly, open minded people are more fun from the beginning. That’s a lesson for all age groups, from teens to 80s. Thanks for your comment.

14. Evan Marc Katz 14

    Thanks, Angela, for the respectful note.

    I think our main source of departure is the definition of a “problematic” man. As you said – “recommending women settle for what they don’t really, truly desire is a recipe for unhappiness.” But what if what they really, truly desire doesn’t exist? What if what it exists as infrequently as a solar eclipse? What if what women want is unrealistic, unfair, and unreasonable? These are the main issues that I think it’s important to address. Because NOBODY – myself and Lori Gottlieb included – advocate for misery. I’m simply suggesting that we all, to a degree, overestimate ourselves. We dissect others and hope that nobody dissects us. And then when we find ourselves standing alone, because all the people we want don’t want us, and all the people who want us are summarily rejected – we complain. The logical solution, it therefore stands to reason, is to compromise, which others describe as “settling”. And, as evidenced by the tone of the Gottlieb debate, the notion of settling is entirely unsettling – to ALL of us.

    As far as your later points, I’m not a slave to orthodoxy. The whole nature of this blog is to challenge beliefs and ask questions. But the REAL belief structure that’s being challenged, Angela, is NOT our parents’ conventional wisdom. No, what’s got everyone up in arms is the concept that all women can’t always have it all. And that’s not something that anyone is particularly comfortable with.

    Frankly, I find this whole debate to be surprising, since the argument is moot to most single women. If the women who are angry at Lori Gottlieb refuse to settle, refuse to compromise, are happy being single, and perfectly content being alone for as long as it takes to find Mr. Perfect, then WHO CARES WHAT LORI GOTTLIEB SAYS? Just go on and live your life. Lori provided some very practical advice specifically to women who want to have their own kids. “Take it from me – an unwed 40 year old single mom. I might have been happier with a guy who gave me 85% at 30, than to be searching for 100% from a worse dating pool ten years later.” That is a thought worth considering. Case closed. You don’t want to consider it – fine. But why the anger?

    I’d forgotten, but I wrote about this in a chapter in Why You’re Still Single called “Hitting on 20″. It’s a blackjack metaphor – and it seems to me that both men and women are not content with a perfectly winning hand. We’re always going to pull for another card, and a lot of times we’re gonna bust. So as I see it – and you may disagree – Lori’s not talking about sticking on 13 or 14. She’s saying that when you have a good guy – an 18 or a 19, it may be wiser to hold onto him than to cast him out – especially as the pool of quality single and interested men diminishes. This is sound advice to SOME women – even if you’re not one of them.

    Finally, the reason this doesn’t apply to men is because men don’t have a biological clock. Plain and simple. Thus, they feel (rightfully and wrongfully) that they can hold out for perfection, longer. But even they’re wrong. Eventuallythe successful 45 year old guy gets pretty damn desperate for a 29 year old bride – only to discover that he, too, has waited too long – and that 29 year old women usually get creeped out by them. They, too, overestimate their value and are shocked, SHOCKED, that the women they covet have no interest in them.

    The moral of the story is this: until we get very clear on what is a) reasonable, and b) realistic, we’re all gonna be single and bitching for a really long time.

15. Steve 15

    
    Angela Crisp Feb 14th 2008 at 11:43 am 13
    To Steve: I think it is wonderful you have found a group that seems right for you to focus on. I date mostly younger men for the same reasons you date younger women. Older guys do have more baggage, just as older women do. I am the lucky one, I lost my baggage at the airport and never bothered to track it back down, lol.
    
    Angela, if that is true, the next time you are near Washington D.C. email me your phone number. I would love to have the night out with someone from my generation.

16. RSL 16

    I’ve been reading the blog for awhile, never posted, but felt inspired today to post. I totally agree with Evan’s points. I would make one change- I don’t call that “settling” I call it maturing and having reasonable expectations. I am a 28 year old woman who has lost both of my parents before the age of 16- so I think I may have come to this conclusion that stability and dependability outranks fireworks every time earlier than most. Although I don’t find it depressing- I find it liberating. For me, it has allowed me to realize that when a guy doesn’t necessarily give me butterflies at first glance, the minute he shows what a solid guy he can be when I might need him, the butterflies come. And they get even stronger when he can let me do that for him as well. It makes it so that my goal when dating is to get to know someone and find something deeper and more genuine than some sparks. And really, the sparks can be totally ignited down the line- although I am single now, it’s happened to me before. When the sparks come a little later than expected, you have a solid base to rely on when the sparks begin to dim. Again, I think I am talking about the same phenomenon as Evan is, I just call it something different.
    One more note- verbosity, I appreciate all the thought you put into your posts, and I’d like to comment on this one. I’ve seen you use this statistic about women intitating divorce several times, and I was curious about it, so I looked it up where you found it. Although the statistic is there, I think the way you are using doesn’t quite support your argument- it appears that you use it as kind of way to implicate women in the rising divorce rates and subsequent rise of single people in their 30s and 40s. Of course women have a part in this phenomenon- I am just not sure that it’s related to this statistic. Here is something is says below the statistic on the site you found it on:
    “Two-thirds of all divorces are initiated by women. One recent study found that many of the reasons for this have to do with the nature of our divorce laws. For example, in most states women have a good chance of receiving custody of their children. Because women more strongly want to keep their children with them, in states where there is a presumption of shared custody with the husband the percentage of women who initiate divorces is much lower. Also, the higher rate of women initiators is probably due to the fact that men are more likely to be “badly behaved.” Husbands, for example, are more likely than wives to have problems with drinking, drug abuse, and infidelity.” (Discovery Health)
    So, basically there are a myriad of reasons women initiate divorce that don’t fit into your argument. I think a women who leaves her husband because she wants to take his money is very different from a woman who leaves her husband because he is an alcoholic who won’t get help- yet both are the “intiators.” It’s really a misleading statistic. I also think the scenario you put forth about the dissatisfied stay-at-home mom is probably pretty confined to the white upper middle and middle class, which is not the majority in our society. And you did say this was just from your anecdotal experience, so I appreciate that.

17. RSL 17

    I meant upper-middle and upper class. Ooops.

18. Markus 18

    Verbosity,

    While I very much sympathize with your content, I think you are rather off topic.

    All,

    Man have I lived this thread. I was dating an incredible girl last year and I broke up with her because I thought something better had come along. I’ve been paying for it ever since.

19. Lisa 19

    If you will settle for nothing less than perfection then that is exactly what you will get: nothing”

    So true Evan. As a 42 yo single mom I can say that I’m looking
    for someone mainly with good character, honesty, loyalty, kindness, ability to hold a job, and I can live with someone with financial difficulties. That can be temporary. Or one who has kids at home…they eventually grow up and leave home.

    The only problem I see with settling for Mr good enough right now, is if you do settle for the sake of having kids, and things don’t work out, its the kids who can suffer. No one should settle just for the sake of having kids. For loneliness, maybe, but not for kids.
    There’s way too many kids growing up in single parent homes now.

    Other than that, I totally agree, no one is perfect, and you have to accept some flaws to find long term happiness.
    The high of finding love wears off and then you have companionate love. It even shifts from one area of the brain to another. And that’s what you need to have a lasting long term relationship.

20. Lance 20

    This is an epic thread. I just got done reading the original article, the rant on Jezebel, the followup interview, and all the comments on EMK’s blog.

    Lori’s perspective is shattering but it also strikes me as totally reasonable…she’s just arguing for it in a way that comes off as controversial. There is often a huge disparity between the romantic ideal and the “solid person” that is marriageable…this is true for both men and women. Lori and Evan both suggest a lowering of expectations IF you’re interested in starting a family. If you’re satisfied with with being single and dating, then there’s no reason to settle, and I agree with that totally. Why not? You’re not in a hurry.

    Here’s the money quote from Lori’s interview:
    “I was so focused on true love that I hadn’t appreciated the purely practical benefits of having a husband. Not only does he contribute financially, help with the dishes, and share in the child care, but as his wife, if you want some companionship or physical intimacy, you don’t have to shave your legs, blow-dry your hair, find a puke-free outfit, apply lipstick, drive to a restaurant and sit through a tedious two-hour meal for the mere possibility of some heavy petting while the babysitter meter is ticking away.”

    Wow! That’s a heavy dose of realism. I think everyone could benefit from having their romantic ideals knocked down a peg or three. It’s not like the movies. Dating is truly a battlefield and I ain’t gonna lie, it makes me glad I don’t have a biological clock.

21. Angela Crisp 21

    verbosity: You make some interesting points, but I actually know women paying alimony to men. I don’t think anyone should get paid out a relationship they wanted unless they are too disabled to work and provide for themselves. This simply complicates a free and open possibility for everyone else because it builds up stereotypes. We need to halt all alimony unless a partner who was fit can no longer provide for themselves.

    Markus: I hear your regret loud and clear. I, too, have let some fantastic men walk out of my life. The question is, how do I manage to find other fantastic men to spend time with now? If I could bottle and sell it, I’m sure I would be rich, lol! I hope you decide to try again, and not blame yourself for a mistake.

    Steve: it is true. I did lose my baggage at the airport. But are we talking about baggage here, something someone should change about themselves to find the person who will be a joy for them to know? Or are you talking about settling for less joy, and toting along our baggage anyway? I would agree people can and do have unreasonable expectations. I am as guilty of that as the rest. I used to call it my “knight-in-shining-armor complex.” (Not really fair to me or to real knights in shining armor, lol) Once I understood that men would never solve a problem for me, but are a problem that once solved (ie., understood, accepted, embraced), the problem would present me with incredible gifts, and so my relationship choices improved. Men have the same problem, we’ll call it the “damsel-in-distress” complex. Wanting real passion has nothing to do with being unrealistic. It is for the individual to decide when this one is the keeper, and when to work on themselves to improve their playing field.

    Now, for Mr. Katz: by problematic, I mean no offense, merely that this individual woman is not satisfied with this individual man. (It may be the man is not satisfied either?) This man might be a joy to someone else, but not to this individual woman. Why ask anyone to “settle” so long as the passion is insufficient? Settling breeds resentment as surely as alimony breeds resentment. Perhaps you can address the unrealistic expectations, and bring them more into line with the flesh-and-blood people one actually has to choose from, but “settling” just to have children is a huge mistake. Becoming realistic is different to me (as a work someone does on themselves) and “settling” for something that does not seem right (a possible deception as far as real passion is concerned, with another person). I think I am mature (at 42, but who really knows, lol), and settling would be a huge mistake for me because I value passion so very much. Again, thank you for your efforts. A.C.

22. Angela Crisp 22

    One final comment on the above. Men do have a biological clock. Low sperm count is a problem that strikes across age groups, and is surely a biological problem for any pair hoping to have children. Male fertility problems has sponsored an entire medical industry. It is not fair to only hang the biological clock on women by the time they pass the age of 32. Thanks again for reading my questionable wisdoms. I hope it means something.

23. Steve 23

    
    Here’s the money quote from Lori’s interview:
    I was so focused on true love that I hadn’t appreciated the purely practical benefits of having a husband. Not only does he contribute financially, help with the dishes, and share in the child care, but as his wife, if you want some companionship or physical intimacy, you don’t have to shave your legs, blow-dry your hair, find a puke-free outfit, apply lipstick, drive to a restaurant and sit through a tedious two-hour meal for the mere possibility of some heavy petting while the babysitter meter is ticking away.
    

    The only two I would insist on the shaved legs and the puke-free outfit and I would compromise on the puke-free outfit if it came off quickly enough

24. trouble 24

    This article makes me think about several guys I work with who are single, but would really like to find “the one.” One guy, Greg, is a stocky balding man, but when you get to know him, you find he is witty, honorable, hilarious, intelligent, and downright adorable. He had such a difficult time finding the right woman. I personally think that a lot of women in this area did not look past the most superficial aspects of him (the bald head, if you can believe that). Because, other than that, I cannot explain why he was still single at 39 (though, shortly to be married).

    A man doesn’t have to look like a Ken doll to be a “real” ™ man who is definitely someone that is a keeper. My friend Greg sure is, and the girl who has kept him is a lucky woman.

    I have another friend Kurt who is by far one of the nicest men I’ve ever known. He’s shy. But when you get to know him, he’s so much fun to spend time with. He’s 30. He doesn’t have a super trendy hairstyle. He doesn’t have that square jaw. But he’s not a bad looking guy, he’s just an average-looking guy. He has so many redeeming qualities, but it seems to me that women in his age group don’t even look at him.

    It makes me sad. From my perspective, at 42, I know that there are many guys like my friends out there who really want to find love, who want a commitment, who want to be married, who want kids. And they are often overlooked by women ages 25-35 who want to have it all.

    You know, I had the handsome, square-jawed husband. And when he cheated on me for the 3rd time, and we got a divorce, I started to learn that the superficial does not matter, in the longrun. What matters is finding a person of substance.

    unfortunately, some of us don’t realize that until we’re in the been there, done that category.

25. verbosity 25

    rsm,

    Good question and point. Disc. Health does mention the divorce laws as a reason. Here’s the quote,

    Two-thirds of all divorces are initiated by women. One recent study found that many of the reasons for this have to do with the nature of our divorce laws. For example, in most states women have a good chance of receiving custody of their children. Because women more strongly want to keep their children with them, in states where there is a presumption of shared custody with the husband the percentage of women who initiate divorces is much lower. Also, the higher rate of women initiators is probably due to the fact that men are more likely to be badly behaved. Husbands, for example, are more likely than wives to have problems with drinking, drug abuse, and infidelity. (Discovery Health)”

    The dots Disc Health did not connect are that the divorce laws favor women retaining custody, and the most oft-used tactic in doing so is to allege drinking, drug abuse, and infidelity. So the laws reward ladies who allege this. I haven’t found any evidence indicating husbands actually have more of these problems. They are, however, more likely to be accused of it, whether true or not, precisely because ladies stand to receive the children (child support) and usually the house as a result of these allegations. I have no problem with the true allegations of alcoholism, etc. The problem is that there is a major built-in incentive to falsely allege these issues, and the stats do not indicate the breakdown of false vs. true claims. There is no way to. A frequent tactic is to get an order of protection by alleging that she is scared of him to kick him out of the marital residence. Possession is 9/10ths of the law, right? (sarcasm). Everything flows from there.

    Whether my comment applies only to white upper & middle class, I do not know. I did not consider that. However, if the the ‘settling’ woman settles on someone who is in part, a good provider (based upon Selena’s original post and other posts I’ve heard in other threads), so that she does not have to work, the class distinctions you mentioned seems as though they’d apply. I disagree with the race one however.

    Markus, I understand that you think my post is a bit far afield. However, if she’s ‘settling’ (particularly to have kids) she is precisely more likely to divorce you later because she’s ‘missing out’ in some fashion. My point is that men who meet these women generally have the laws, courts, and odds stacked so far against them, it isn’t worth pursuing the marriage/children route. If you (or anyone) feels that knowing the risks, those risks are acceptable, so be it.

26. Angela Crisp 26

    Steve: You have made me laugh, so thank you. I totally agree that effort is required to maintain passion, and the image of the outfit (however puked, lol) coming off, like right now, is priceless. The article that started all this does seem to focus mostly on what a man can do for a woman rather than what two people can do for each other. Financial considerations are pretty minor, because even a millionaire can blow it all in a hurry. Will you love him when he has to stay home, looking for work? Perhaps a good question to ask before it gets very serious. I would like to think real passion can sustain that, as well as the usual stress of child rearing. I would love to get together with you sometime in D.C. I am actively dating now, so a lot of this comes home for me. Great blogging everyone, thank you.

27. verbosity 27

    Angela, I understand your point, but I’m quite certain that the numbers of women paying alimony to men are far, far in the minority. One of the big reasons for this is that most ladies seek men who earn more so they can have children & potentially stay at home.

    I’m not sure I get get the thrust of your point “I don’t think anyone should get paid out a relationship they wanted unless they are too disabled to work and provide for themselves.” Disability doesn’t matter. The fact is that the law operates to pay out and redistribute money absent any disability. It pays people who choose not to work and let their skills atrophy. That is my point.

28. Angela Crisp 28

    verbosity: Here I am arguing against the state of current US laws. I don’t believe in alimony unless circumstances, such as losing the use of one’s legs, arms or eyes, makes for a special circumstance. I would make allowances for those situations, but as a rule, alimony, in any direction, breeds resentment, and reinforces stereotypes. Perhaps I know a few women who make money in excess of their ex husbands, who knows? But I have seen this happen, so I am against alimony because it motivates people to pay attention to the money, rather than the passion, of a particular relationship. Child support, ok, we are talking about kids who can’t work and need to grow up. Most of the women I know with small children don’t get child support or alimony without going back to court. Two I cover through my own health care insurance because they are so panicked about their kids. Money after a relationship is over is simply wrong in my view. Children need and deserve support, so the little ones do change the situation of who ever provides the most care. If a marriage breaks up, and no kids, I say each can support themselves. I have never been married so I have never been divorced. I would never accept a payment after a relationship ends, and have never sought such a situation. I recognize what the law does, and I find the law to be deficient, and not helpful. No fault divorce should mean no fault. Thank you for your response. A.C.

29. verbosity 29

    I hear ya Angela & agree.

30. Angela Crisp 30

    verbosity: And so I argue against the law, whether it benefits women or men. Are you not resentful of these laws? It seems to simply breed up stereotypes of women, the old “gold digger” standard. I believe that this kind of 19th century legal structure should end. No one should have to pay their old lover just because they were in love, and now that has changed. A few mitigating circumstances I can see, but if considering those circumstances means maintaining a structure that causes men to suspect, and resent women, I think women can live without it. I get called an alimony seeker anytime I even bring up marriage, so I prefer to remain unmarried, and keep my men feeling safe with me. Thanks for your insights. A.C.

31. smartcookie 31

    I was trying to read this article with an open mind, but then I saw this section line.

    “They, like me, would rather feel alone in a marriage than actually be alone, because they, like me, realize that marriage ultimately isn’t about cosmic connection it’s about how having a teammate, even if he’s not the love of your life, is better than not having one at all.”

    I felt like I was punched in the stomach…do women really feel this way?

    Wow-i just can’t swallow this. I mean, i don’t think we should hold out for perfection, but geez, it’s a little extreme. its almost like saying a man can give me a family and those children are going to make up for what I am missing in my marriage, in my life? That seems MORE dangerous because the children will pay the price…

    can companionship between spouses provide a healthy home life for children? is companionship what you want to teach those children to look for when it comes to marriage?

    this whole idea makes life seem so dull.

32. Honey 32

    Thanks to my buddy Lance for turning me on to this thread. The comments seem to have taken their own turn, but here’s my take:

    1) As a friend I mentioned this to pointed out, if “settling” to have your own kids is what women are after, 30 is too late. Guys in their 30s are dating girls in their 20s. Guys in their 40s are divorced, have already had their own biological children, and don’t want to make any with you.

    2) A HUGE cause of divorce is the stress of child-rearing. Would you really want to undertake that with someone you knew wasn’t a perfect fit from the very beginning?

    3) This in the spirit of Evan’s blog, which doesn’t shy away from controversial issues. WHY DO PEOPLE HAVE THEIR OWN BIOLOGICAL KIDS ANYWAY? Seriously.

    Given world overpopulation, the scarcity of resources, and the number of unwanted children all over the world, I feel it is unethical to do anything other than adopt. I understand I can only speak for myself with any sort of authority, but not one thing about having children sounds compelling, interesting, or even rational to me. It does not sound financially responsible. It does not sound intellectually compelling. It does not sound emotionally fulfilling.

    Now, I understand that I’m in the minority, and that there are people out there who truly enjoy the company of children and are willing to make tremendous sacrifices in order to have the presence of children in their lives. However, I would argue that number is a FRACTION of the people who say they want children and/or who actually have them. And jumping onto that bandwagon uncritically or uninformed is a great way to end your romantic partnership, whether he/she is your “soulmate” from the beginning or not.

    IMO, people want to have their own biological children for the same reasons they hold out when they should, according to Gottlieb, “settle”: they overestimate their own value. In the case of having kids, they overestimate their value to the point that they believe their (potential) offspring are (or will be) smarter, better looking, or otherwise more deserving than any of the MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of kids who already exist. If we’re going to talk about adjusting our priorities here, then that seems to be the place to start to me.

33. Steve 33

    Bravo “Honey”!

    FWIW, the world replacement is slightly over 2 children per couple. If you have to have your own kids, think about the world your grand children will have to live in and limit your family size to 2 kids. If enough people do that, the fraction of the world replacement rate to the right of the decimal will let the world population slowly come down.

34. Lance 34

    Honey, THAT’S the money comment of the week right there! I’ve had those same thoughts (maybe from talking with you) but I’ve never articulated as concisely as that.

    Why have kids? Seriously? To satisfy an internal craving? It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

    Consider that, on average, over 357,000 babies are born daily. EVERY SINGLE DAY. One could argue that it’s not just foolish to bring more children into the world, but it’s irresponsible.

35. A-L 35

    I have to say, I think this topic is far more universal than some of the people here are making it. This is not just about women, and not just about people who want their own biological children. It’s the question of how good does one’s significant other need to be in order to make a life-long commitment to him/her.

    Even for people who do not want kids, I think there’s still a strong desire to find someone. I think it’s part of human nature to want to share that companionship, trust, and intimacy with someone else. And no matter how great our friends and families are, and how happy we are being single ourselves, we’re still looking for that other person. Particularly since, statistically speaking, most people are going to get married and have kids. And if you’re the one left over, still single, you find yourself increasingly alone. Though there’s nothing wrong with being alone, most people want companionship, somewhere to share their hopes and dreams with, and accomplish them.

    So, that brings me back to my original question. How good does someone need to be to make a life-long commitment to them? I think Steve made a really good point. Settling, I think, in this context means accepting accepting Mr. Human instead of holding out for Mr. Knight In Shining Armor. Just make it a gender-neutral (or gender-inclusive) comment. Is it 98%, 90%, 80%, 60%, or 51%? I’m 27, and I’m aiming for 90%. I’m also hoping that it’s realistic, but high enough of a standard that there won’t be any regrets. I’ll just have to see.

36. downtowngal 36

    I really don’t like all of this “oh, woe is me I’m a single woman who needs advice blah blah” stuff.

    I think this all has to do with how you define “settling”. Is it someone you really don’t love and might resent 5 years down the line while having an affair with the UPS guy? I have girlfriends who married in their late 20′s because they were afraid of being alone, only to divorce a few years later.

    As for 40something commitment phobic guys, I have news for you, these same guys were commitmentphonbes when they were in their 30′s and 20′s. I also think it’s a bunch of bullcrap that single guys in their 40′s all prefer women under 35; sure many do but I think it has more to do with the guys than with the women, as lots of guys I know that age prefer someone closer to their maturity level. I also know women in their early 30′s who have had fertility issues and women in their 40′s who got pregnant the old fashioned way. Fact is, most married people have kids within a year or two of marriage, regardless of age. And if a guy in his 40′s will only date women under a certain age, he’s also ‘settling’ because he’s seeking love for the wrong reasons.

    When I was in my late 20′s early 30′s I thought the idea of dating a guy 10 years older was creepy. Also, women outlive men, so why would I want to spend the prime of my life and sexual peak being someone’s nursmaid?

    The real message is about having realistic expectations about what makes a good relationship – a tall guy who runs a hedge fund but doesn’t always have time for you, or a short, bald guy who makes you smile and would move mountains for you, you and only you?

37. Paul 37

    Americans tend to be spoiled idealists…we’ve largely got it all wrong in this society, and I think Evan is right by saying that there are way too many folks looking to “have it all”, and that just doesn’t exist. People immediantly jump to opposite extremes in their thinking…to compromise is not settling at all, it’s reality. It might be politically incorrect at the moment, but most things that are politically incorrect are just that…incorrect. This notion of finding “the one” is really ill conceived and there is nothing biblical about it AT ALL. I read in a book called “Keeping Love Alive” by Gary Smalley that the three most important things in a relartionship are 1) Honor (which would include respect, etc – try having a relationship without it), 2) deep levels of communication (to go past areas of conflict to get to deep levels of emotional intimacy), and 3) building each other up (mutually supportive). So it seems to me that compatibility is more important than chemistry, and just about any two people can have an extremely satisfying long term relationship if they continue to do these ‘right’ things stated above…meaning that it is not really a matter of finding Mr or Mrs right (or “the one”) anyway, but BEING Me or Mrs right. The bible puts it another way…”men love your wives, wives respect your husbands” (Eph 5:33) – BOTH are unconditional (key…women have a harder time with that concept then men do…respect should not be something that is earned…it is as unconditional as love) . In short, we are to do certain things as men and women in a relationship and if we do, we’ll be successful.

38. Collins 38

    Right on, Lance! As recently as the 19th century, it may have been practical for couples to produce a lot of kids to make sure a few lived to adulthood. But in today’s world (esp. in the US, Canada, Australia & European countries) a couple can have just one child who most likely will live to adulthood. I for one am thankful that my family is doing its part to save the world just by staying small. I am the younger of 2; neither my sister nor I have ever married or had kids, or expect ever to do either. And just like verbosity, I’m concerned about the high risk of being divorced & incurring child support debt. In contemporary western societies, when a man fathers a child, he sows the seeds of his own financial ruin.

    But to get closer to the original topic, “settling” can apply to BOTH genders. For example, a man’s ideal mate might be a Heidi Klum or Tyra Banks lookalike, but if he’s realistic he’ll “settle” for the Plain Jane with a few extra pounds. I may picture myself attached to a woman with singing/musical talent, dark skin & thinly braided hair, but I can do without all that as long as she pulls her weight in the r’ship & accepts the equal responsibilities that come with equal rights. Looks may attract me initially, but attitude keeps me in the long run.

39. Markus 39

    First, and I don’t know if this is permitted but the author was on “Talk of the Nation” the other day and it was fantastic. Here is the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18952108

    And Honey, point number one is right on. I’m 38, had 2 kids by the time I was 32 and I am NOT getting this vascectomy reversed for anyone. And believe me, it costs me on the dating scene.

    Anyway, to everyone out there that isn’t getting this point: the point about settling is precisely that even if you find Mr. Perfect on his white stallion your buzz will not last and you will resent him anyway. We need to stop thinking that those feelings can last for the rest of our lives. 3, 5 years into any marriage, esp one with kids, and even with a solid man, you will feel like you’re settling. Book it.

    Peace.

40. Steve 40

    
    downtowngal Feb 14th 2008 at 08:06 pm 36

    I think this all has to do with how you define settling. Is it someone you really don’t love and might resent 5 years down the line while having an affair with the UPS guy?
    

    It is those shorts, isn’t it?

41. Steve 41

    
    Paul Feb 14th 2008 at 08:48 pm 37
    I read in a book called Keeping Love Alive by Gary Smalley that the three most important things in a relartionship are 1) Honor (which would include respect, etc – try having a relationship without it), 2) deep levels of communication (to go past areas of conflict to get to deep levels of emotional intimacy), and 3) building each other up (mutually supportive).
    

    I’m surprised he didn’t put money in that list. FWIW, I think an equitable distribution of housework is the Pearl Harbor of relationship killers…too many men, including relationship experts don’t take it seriously as a relationship stressor.

42. Angela Crisp 42

    Smartcookie: I agree with you. It takes a powerful connection between a man and a woman to pull off a home life, much less handle the stress of even one child, biological or adopted. Settling merely strips back what could be a better situation for the couple and the child(ren). Its not about seeking an impossible ideal, it is about trying to get what is best for you for your own contentment. Waiting for contentment is worth it in my opinion, for the sake of myself, children or no. Thanks for reading and your kind response. A.C.

43. Angela Crisp 43

    Paul: I would like to know why you believe women have a harder time with respect then men? In Biblical terms, if women have a harder time respecting men, do men have a harder time loving women, thus the injunction to each? I would say for me to stay with a man, I would ask him to earn my love and respect prior to any commitment. I would also expect to earn his love and respect, also called getting to know someone else and falling in love. Am I asking too much for a response like that from a man? I would be interested in knowing your thoughts. Thanks for reading and your kind response. A.C.

44. ABF 44

    I think there is a real difference between settling and being open-minded and realistic about potential mates (this goes for both men and women). Nobody should “settle” for the mere sake of havinig a spouse and children. That merely breed resentment and discontent. Being open-minded, on the other hand, allows you to make a deeper connection with someone that you might otherwise never given a moment’s notice.

    As an aside to the alimony debate in this thread: the law is shifting towards a more equitable system. See http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202990186611

45. Steve 45

    About having children.

    I remember reading some articles and stats that parents are not any less likely to spend their final years alone in convalescent homes. They are also not any less likely to die alone.

    It seems to me many people focus on having children without ever considering if they WANT to be parents or if they have TIME to be parents.

    You shouldn’t have kids, if having kids is just an item on your lifetime to-do list. They are human beings and not accessories.

    Ask yourself:

    - Do you really know what the day to day reality of being a parent is like?

    - If yes, do you want that day to day reality.

    - Do you have TIME to be a REAL parent or are your kids going to grow up in a day care center? There is a lot of research ( and yes, not from social conservative ) that shows that quantity *IS* quality time as far as children are concerned. Are you ready to come home after a long day of work and be enthusiastic about being with them?

    If you aren’t sure get an idea of what it is like having another living thing dependent on you. Babysit a small child for several weeks. Foster a rescued dog until you can find it a home.

46. verbosity 46

    Good post, ABF re: alimony. I would like to point out a few things for readers in general.

    The law.com article shows that these are simply proposed legislative measures. They need to be approved by the legislative branches of each respective state AND then signed by the executive. Not an easy path.

    The article mentions the NY and NV proposal to provide ‘guidelines’ in place of judges’ discretion. In reality, they are one and the same as practiced. For Example, AZ has a 10+ ‘gudelines’ in determining an award of spousal maintenance. (shouldn’t we call it EX-spousal maintanance?). Judges have unlimited discretion in determining how much of these guidelines they are going to apply. For example, a judge might say to himself, “I’m going to weight the style and accustomed manner of living during the marriage 98% and the fact she has a college degree 2%” Thereby weighing his efforts (style of living) more than hers (her education). Judges do not write opinions detailing this thought process.

    It’s just like the use of the word ‘reasonable’ in law. What does it mean? Damn near anything. Same things with these ‘guidelines.’

    Contrast that with child support, capped by law in AZ to $2,500 max. That isn’t a guideline. There has to be major extenuating circumstances in existence for ANY deviation from this, and they need be well-documented by the parties and the court.

    I applaud MA’s efforts, but my God, isn’t it pathetic they’ve already made their system so to take earnings from a 2nd wife (in part) and give it to the 1st?

    But this whole thing regarding ‘guidelines’ is mere window-dressing, as it doesn’t limit judicial discretion (abuse) in any practical, meaningful way. It’s placation.

    It is positive, however, that more legislators are becoming aware.

47. verbosity 47

    For the above post, it relates back to what men face if these women ‘settle’ for them, and later become unhappy. Lori Gottleib wrote, “So if you rarely see your husband but he’s a decent guy who takes out the trash and sets up the baby gear, and he provides a second income that allows you to spend time with your child instead of working 60 hours a week to support a family on your own how much does it matter whether the guy you marry is The One?”

    The exposure to men for providing women the flexibility to have children and not work simply isn’t worth it the vast majority of the time.

48. verbosity 48

    Lastly, the thought just occurred to me….if a woman is ‘settling’ so that she can have children, doesn’t this completely discount men’s role and value as incidental? He’s simply there to provide her with sperm for the child so SHE can be fulfilled, and to help with all of those other pesky things of life, like providing a home, its maintenance, child’s future health and educational needs, etc? He exists merely as an instrument to fulfill her child bearing desires. Doesn’t he deserve more?

    Food for thought…

49. Honey 49

    Steve, unfortunately there is absolutely no evidence that the present 6+ (almost 7!) billion people is a sustainable world population. I googled around a little bit to try to find information on this, and many people are asking the question. There is an organization called Negative Population Growth that claims 2 billion is the maximum sustainable population. I have no idea if that’s true, but if it is, then we’re all in big trouble. But I hadn’t considered the issue before in terms of sustainability. Thanks for getting me thinking!

50. Eda 50

    To Verbosity:

    Why do you visit this website? You don’t seem to like or respect women. You definitely don’t have any use for the institution of marriage. I’m not even certain that you think relationships are worthwhile. It just seems that all you ever want to do is state how divorce leaves men finanacially devastated and their ex-wives living high on the hog. Ok. Your message is loud and clear. Women are leeches; men who marry them are stupid ninnies.

    Can you now try something really wacky and different and provide constuctive and useful information for people who haven’t yet abandoned hope on a relationship or marraige?

51. Li-Ann 51

    I can’t comment on the settling issue to have children, since I’ve never had children and my drive to meet someone had nothing to do with having children. I just was never the type of women who would squeal with glee when I saw a baby – but I know there are a lot of women out there who have an enormous drive to have a baby. I just wasn’t one of them. I also had friends tell me that once they had a baby, that baby became their everything, and really much more important than the man.

    I read the article carefully, and Evan’s comments. I give my two cents from the perspective of someone who went through their twenties never settling, and them married the “love of my life” at 33. Only to have it end in my 40s.

    The problem is that by the time one thinks about settling, it is really too late. There would be no way that I’d settle, right up to 33. I was always looking for the one. For me it wasn’t about money or possessions – it was a romantic ideal. Usually these romantically handsome and fascinating men were unemployed or barely employed. At that time, the only person pushing me to settle was my Mother. I didn’t listen. She’d say that in the end its going to be about the day-to-day – the housework, etc. She said that the euphoria will settle down with just about anybody, and it would be a lot better to deal with the stresses of marriage and at least have money than be broke.

    I married someone I felt the spark with. He had no job, no car. I looked after him. In the end, we parted when he finally got a decent job. No kids. I didn’t ask for any money, a clean break,. He did make the mean comment that in the end it will be easier for him to find someone new than for me. After all, even if we both were 10 years older- for a woman that’s a problem, and for a man, he said the fact that he has his hair, is 6 ft. tall, and has a job, is really all he needs. He used to laugh sarcastically about short men, and how he had such an ease in meeting women, even including when he had no money. I felt that was all so very unfair. It ends up being true. Once he had a good job, he wanted to get someone younger.

    Looking back, I probably would make all the same mistakes over again. The guys I rejected in my 20s might have been better partners. However, I bet I would have felt like I was missing something. The guy I was with, despite out initial passion, turned out to be abusive at times, and always taking more out of the relationship than he returned. I was really just like a maid. Many times I would think how much nicer it would be to be with someone who was at least kind hearted.

    So my feelings are mixed. Now that I think about it, there was a super nice guy back in my twenties that I rejected for being boring. Things might have worked out well with him. Still, I feel I need to have at least the slightest spark.

    Maybe I misread Evans intelligent comments, but it seems to send a not very hopeful message to women over 40. The advice seems to be summarized in that a woman should not be so picky in her twenties and early thirties, and take someone who would be a good husband. By your forties, the pool will be so small, that it will be almost impossible to find anyone, especially if you still wanted a family. I take that to mean I have a very small, maybe 5% chance or less, of getting someone now. And even that is probably with some heavy duty settling. I guess that’s pretty sad, because based on what I’ve just read, it’s all over for me.

    One comment that caught my attention in the original article was that men don’t need to settle – that there are more women who want marriage than men. Is that really how it is?

52. Evan Marc Katz 52

    Men don’t have the same biological imperatives to have to settle. But even men price themselves out of the market if they wait too long to settle down after 25 years of confirmed bachelorhood.

    As far as this message not being hopeful, Li-Ann? I want to acknowledge that it’s not all rosy – especially if your goal is to find a man your age to be the biological father of your children. If you’re fine with adoption and fine dating older men, your picture is a lot sunnier. But to suggest that most 40 year old men are searching for 40 year old women is simply untrue and it would be irresponsible to say otherwise.

    So where does this leave you? Hopefully, vigilant about making something happen in your love life. Get online, start taking adult education classes, go to Meetup.com, hire a matchmaker, join a local singles adventure organization, go out with your girlfriends, attend parties, keep your eyes open in real life. All is not lost, not by a long shot. For as depressing as this outlook seems to be, I can tell you story after story after story of women finding love between 35-45. Your only hope is to stay optimistic and pro-active. And I only wish that the information you get here helps you in some small way.

    Have a great weekend.

    Evan

53. Link Love | Honey and Lance 53

    [...] questions and responds to dating and relationship issues. There’s an absolutely titillating response post to an article called, “Marry Him! The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough” by Lori [...]

54. verbosity 54

    To Eda:

    This is not about me, so don’t try to make it so. I do believe that as an institution the way it is constituted, there is zero benefit for men to marry. That is not to say that men and women are not or cannot have long and happy relationships. They can and should. They simply need not marry to prove that.

    That said, what is the resentment for me providing education to men in the dating/marriage arena? If after they know the risks, they assume them, so be it. It is not up to me to do something whacky and different and provide constructive information. I just think that, given the topic that women who believe they should ‘settle’ for ‘Mr. Good Enough’ need to sell why this is a good deal for men. So far, I haven’t heard anything bordering on persuasive.

    Someone, please persuade me.

55. Steve 55

    Honey;

    I wasn’t talking about sustainability, but reducing the population. If most couples limited themselves to just 2 children ( hopefully less ) not enough people would be born to replace everyone. The world population would SLOWLY decline. Most couples are not going to adopt, go childless, or limit themselves to one child so I tell them the good news of the world replacement rate being slightly ( by a fraction ) over 2 kids per couple.

56. Steve 56

    In reference to post #55.

    I hate to quote wikipedia ( not the best source ) but here is what I mean about a limit of 2 children per family being a good compromise between being responsible and going with the urges to be a biological parent:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-replacement_fertility

    My apologies for the off topic post. This week I am on the patch for posting novellas. Next week I will work at staying on topic. After that I will work on limiting myself to 34 comments a day.

57. Eda 57

    To Verbosity:

    It is about you — it’s about you and your agenda to dissuade men from getting married. Funny thing is, Verbosity, I actually have no desire to get married — I never have — probably because I have never wanted to have children and because I see marriage as being oppressive — for me. However, just because I don’t want to get married, I don’t try to convince other women that they shouldn’t want to get married either. Yet, it seems that every chance you get, no matter what the topic, you’ve got to point out that men should not get married because women screw men over when they get divorced. Yes, men do get screwed over, and plenty of women get screwed over as well. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT! So, don’t pretend that you are providing important information that is new news. Plus, if divorce is so horrible for men, why do men often get married a second time when statistics would suggest, that there is a very high probably that they are going to get divorced again? And, many times, men will get married again before their ex’s do. Clearly, men are getting something out of marriage that you don’t/can’t/won’t see.

    But what disturbs me even more than your anti-marriage stance, is your dislike of, and disrespect for, women — I notice that you didn’t deny that’s how you feel. And, if you do, again I ask, why are you on this website? I am sure there is at least one anti-woman, anti-marriage website where you can feel right at home.

58. hunter 58

    to verbosity,

    ….you say there is zero benefit for men to marry?….hhmmmhh…one benefit that comes to mind,,,, if she is sexy,,,,, and you don’t marry her,,,,,, someone else will!…..LOL!……

59. hunter 59

    To li-ann,

    ..a half a century has gone by right before my eyes,,,and it seems as if I meet more women my age, than when I was in my 20′s….

60. Hadley Paige 60

    One Man’s view of women who are Settling

    If women follow the suggestion of the article and settle so that they can get married & have kids, does it not follow that conversely men are getting a women “out of their league”? If the woman settles w/o a philosophy & attitude adjustment (Namely: lowered expectations >> increased contentment vs. same higher level of expectations and entry into “settled” marriage >> increased discontent), I think for me this would not be good for my goal of a successful LTR.

    Why? I think settling leads to (IMHO) increased likelihood of divorce and leads me to conclude (as a man who is mindful of the effect of divorce on me [namely financial atomic bomb]), that I should choose a women as a wife who is not settling, but rather someone who is thrilled to get me, someone who perceives me as uplifting her.

    Note to responders to this post: I encourage you not to fall for the logical fault of discounting or dismissing facts or suggested inferences which you may not like. I am not attached to the above suggestion, nor does it necessarily appeal to me, but it occurred to me after reading the article on settling.

    Bottom line for me at this point is: I don’t think I want a women who is settling for me bc I think the likelihood of a successful LTR is diminished by that fact. Opinions ??? (not on whether you like this but whether you think it is likely true)

61. Jeannie 61

    Thank you for this article Evan. You have raised a topic that I and my single girlfriends (30s, 40s and 50s) discuss just about every single time we get together. Are our standards unrealistic? Should we settle? What is good enough? At what age should we just give up?

    Frankly most of my single girlfriends opt to “settle” and play out the point that Hadley has raised. A number of my girlfriends date men who are 8+ years older than them and every single one of my girlfriends doing this do it for the money. Not one of them loves their guy and these men have no clue that all they are good for is their credit card. When us girlfriends get together, they complain about how they don’t love their older beaus, they don’t strike me as really being happy for having “settled.” My childless girlfriends are looking to settle for a sperm bank – again, the men involved have no clue – and I know how that will end as that was once me.

    Once upon a time, I settled for Mr. Good Enough so I could have babies – and joined the ranks of the 70% of women who divorce their husbands 11 years later. It devastated my husband and I realized that “settling” is just a more polite term for using another human being. and that is wrong. Men deserve to be loved fully for themselves and not because they are a sperm bank or a credit card. And if a woman is settling for a man, she is keeping him from the possibility of meeting someone who would truly love him. Very unfair to him.

    Underpinning this premise is also a bit of sexism against men. Sure I have friends with unrealistic expectations. But for the most part, my friends ask no more of a man than they ask of themselves. So the notion of “settling” suggests that men could not possibly be the equals of women in terms of looks, emotional health, romance, finances etc. It implies that a very attractive woman should not expect to have an attractive man cause there aren’t enough of them out there. And there is an implication that there are no quality single men in their 40s. This is a terrible way to view men and Evan, as you so wisely bonk us ladies on the head when we complain “there are no good men,” it really isn’t true.

    As a 40 something woman, yeah, dating can be a slog and I’ve kissed a lot of toads. But I have had the privilege of meeting a lot of men in a 2 year period and hearing their adventures in dating. And frankly men have it no easier than women. And men have a lot of unrealistic expectations too.

    I am learning that a lot of men just don’t understand women and what creates attraction in us and how to romance us and so everyone loses. I met a lot of nice guys who just couldn’t create that spark – they didn’t know how. Go to any bookstore to the relationship section and it is all targeted to women – there is nothing out there to help men navigate the world of women and thats unfortunate. If this information was available, this conversation would be a lot less necessary.

62. verbosity 62

    Hey Eda,

    Please discuss the subject matter. You may not like how I put forth my points as they are particularly blunt. Too bad. Hadley Paige just asked the same thing I did (albeit with far more diplomacy).

    So please quit your whining about how I am supposedly anti-woman and do not respect women. You know nothing of me, halelujah. It’s not worth the time to respond to your little diatribe, especially as it is off-topic. I’m not going to take that bait, so please go whine somewhere else.

    Curiously, you still cannot or will not respond to Haldey’s or my concern that a woman who ‘settles’ for a guy is more likely to have a successful LTR. That is the topic. Please stay on it.

    Apologies to other readers who may not like the tone of this post. Just because someone doesn’t like the inference or point of my posts or others’ posts, that is no reason to sling unfounded accusations at me or other said posters. As Hadley said, “However, sometimes I encourage you not to fall for the logical fault of discounting or dismissing facts or suggested inferences which you may not like.”

63. verbosity 63

    Typo – “my concern that a woman who settles for a guy is more likely to have a successful LTR.”

    Should be “my concern that a woman who settles for a guy is more likely to have an unsuccessful LTR.”

    Apologies

64. Selena 64

    Well Hadley,
    Can’t speak for everyone, but who wouldn’t want a partner who was thrilled to have them? Knowing someone you loved “settled” for you seems like it would be rather unnerving. But how many people who do choose to “settle” tell those partners anyway? Might blow the whole deal. The whole idea of settling for someone you wouldn’t otherwise CHOOSE, or to be the person someone settles FOR just because…, seems terribly sad at it’s core.

    As far as how divorces rank in terms of “settling”? Has there yet been a study? Dunno, but many, many people find themselves single parents at some point in their lives regardless. Something to be aware of if you are considering “settling” for the reason you want children.

65. Markus 65

    Verbosity,

    Your (main) post came of as mean spirited. Trust me. I was married for 10 years. She cheated on me with another married man. We have joint custody and I pay her between $800-$1000/month in CHILD SUPPORT aka the new alimony. Still, you were mean.

    That said I feel the need to reference the following website:
    http://womensinfidelity.com/

    Given the statistics, you are right, there really is no good reason for men to marry. I mean, if we have devolved (and it is devolution) to the point where we cannot stand each other for more than a few years than we should be honest about it and come up with a more equitable system. Hell, maybe we could just start marketing our genes (sorry short guys) and fix it services. I can see it now. For $500 I’ll mow your lawn, kill that spider and give you a vial. How vile.

    Peace, out.

66. Selena 66

    Jeannie,

    Thanks for your post as someone who’s “been there, done that”.

    “I realized that settling is just a more polite term for using another human being.” Pretty powerful.

67. hunter 67

    to jeannie,

    Bravo!..Bravo!….you get a stand-up applause from me, and I am tossing roses at you…..for your admission…good speech…

68. A-L 68

    In a different thread (the one about the guy who didn’t want to have premarital sex and couldn’t find a girl to date him http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/sex-is-wrong-outside-marriage/) the majority of responders told him that he was looking in the wrong places for the type of women who would suit him best. May I suggest that some of the men mentioned on this forum have done the same thing?

    Where are you meeting these money-hungry women? What are your screening criteria? And how do you advertise yourself? Men who woo their woman by constantly buying her gifts, taking her out to expensive restaurants, paying for vacations together (or acting as though they can do those things) are going to attract the gold-diggers, no questions asked. At the same time, these are probably women who rate a 9 or 10 on both the beauty and fitness scales. Perhaps you should take Evan’s advice of being more open to different types of people than who you’ve originally envisioned yourself and you might find the right one who’s interested in you and not what you can do for her. Even if you’re capable of spending the big bucks, do so only occasionally. If the girl’s only after your money, she won’t last.

    And for those who are worrying about the specter of divorce, ever thought about finding a more religiously minded woman? Most of those believe in ” till death do us part” unless there are some major issues, like abuse. And should a divorce happen, I’d venture to guess that most would find it immoral to get a financial advantage from it.

69. m 69

    “Curiously, you still cannot or will not respond to Haldey’s or my concern that a woman who settles for a guy is more likely to have a successful LTR. That is the topic. Please stay on it. ‘

    YOU wouldn’t.

    So don’t chide her. It’s exhibiting your usual rude lack of manners — as well as your disrespect for women. You don’t speak/write to men on the site that way.

    Not to mention the fact that she’s absolutely right.

70. hunter 70

    to A-L,

    The kind of woman that fits the description in every paragraph you wrote, does exist,… however,…. I don’t think she gets out much, most stay in their own little circles,…they may venture out, only to get hurt/runover/used, so, they stay away from relationships….

    ……there is an analogy that goes something like this, the moon is feminine, the sun is masculine, the moon is feminine because it gives off a very pretty soft light. Dads must protect their daughters from the suns powerful rays, because they burn….

71. hunter 71

    to Jeannie,

    ..you wrote it so well, that, I am copying it again for male lurkers,…”I am learning,,,that a lot of men just don’t understand women and what creates attraction in us,,,and,,,how to romance us”…

72. kisarita 72

    settle? depends on what you are settling on.
    I agree (at least intellectually instead of emotionally) with the thrust of the article that one need not expect to be head over heels in love, since this type of love doesn’t last.
    but basic physical chemistry? got to be there, if you plan to sleep with this person for the rest of your life.
    as for me, i took the opposite route: in my 20s believed that if you find a nice guy, decent looking, responsible, with similar lifestyle and values who you get along with, you should marry him. somehow i never did find him. (or find one that wanted me). Now in my 30′s i fell in love for the first time at age 32, it didn’t work out because the guy was a scuzz, but basically now i’m willing to settle for a lot of that bit about responsibility, commonality shit for some sex and romance.

73. kisarita 73

    before i knew what love and great sex was, it wasn’t so important to me… but now it trumps all

74. Steve 74

    It seems like with every blog entry Evan makes, what he had to write seems reasonable. It seems like the arguments in the comments come from taking the same words and using them to references something else.

75. Markus 75

    A-L,

    I’m sorry but I’m not sure your post is relevant. I did not accuse my ex of being money hungry. If you follow the link I left to womensinfidelity earlier you can read about the myriad of reasons for it’s rise and occurence at all. And by the way, I’m not saying that men don’t cheat or that we’re never at fault in bad relationships. What I said was that, after our divorce, I have to pay my ex around $800/month and more in the summer for “camp”. I know my ex isn’t rich and she doesn’t live like it. The fact remains that now I have my kids less than 50% of the time and am out that money every month. Guess what? I also need to exist. You know, just survive. Do you have any idea what it’s like to try and have a house, a working vehicle and pay that every month? It’s almost unworkable AND our arrangement is actually not NEARLY as bad as it could be. If we had followed “the formula” for my state and county I would be paying much more. Why should anyone sign up for that kind of situation?

    Now, addressing your other point. First, I’m not that religious. I’m not a Christian Fundamentalist or even a hardcore Catholic. I’m more spiritual than anything. Still, my ex swore an oath to me in a Church full of our friends and family and she came from a family that was involved in her (Lutheran) church and had no divorces. It was not as if I made an iffy gamble. Maybe it’s my upbringing, or being a man, or a Taurus, Lord knows but I think there’s a special place in hell for oath breakers. At least I remember Dante indicating such. So, it would be unfair and difficult of me to try and date people who went to church frequently and read the Bible a lot, etc. I will accept some blame in that, as kind of a granola, ski-bum sort, I tend to be attracted to to artsy, free-spirit types. That said, I’m not complaining about anyone I’ve dated since the divorce, just the myriad of women who cheat and divorce because we cannot provide that wedding day buzz for the rest of our lives. God bless.

76. verbosity 76

    Apologies to all for what may appear to be some ‘antagonistc’ posts by me. That is not the intent. In the effort to be clear and provide sufficient fact and background for my points, I am admittedly blunt and sometimes too wordy. I will endeavor to alter this in the future.

    That said, Jeannie’s post was powerful, as it alluded (answered?) to what I said and Hadley’s concerns also. Would any other ladies like to weigh in on this?

77. A-L 77

    Markus,

    When I was making my comments about the money-grubbing wives I guess I was feeling the influence of Verbosity’s posts and Jeannie’s friends and responding to that more than anything else. But in terms of child support (and I’m asking other men here as well) can it be just a matter of the fact that children are EXPENSIVE? Day care/after-school care can easily eat up $800-1000 per month, plus you’ve got food, a larger place to have the kids stay, other incidentals like clothing, medications, toys, (and private school, if you’re so inclined). Later on there will be buying a car and getting car insurance, gas, etc once they get their drivers’ license. And are you expected to contribute toward the kids’ college education in addition to this amount, or is your ex supposed to be putting some of that money into savings. So yes, $1000/month is still a lot of money, but is it money that would (or should) have been spent on the kids anyway even if you were still married? Perhaps the scary thing for men is not getting married and then getting divorced, but rather just having kids. Divorce when there are no kids involved is probably significantly less expensive unless you’ve been married for 50 years or something. Just my $0.02.

78. A-L 78

    On Markus’ second point:

    Though religious extremists catch the majority of the headlines nowadays, there are plenty of moderate and liberal religious people out there. Not the bible-beaters trying to convert people on every block, but open-minded people who follow a religious doctrine because they believe in its moral guidelines. Many marry people who are not as religious as they are.

    At the same time, however, I believe that most American weddings occur in a church (or other house of worship). And nearly half of all marriages end in divorce. Obviousy there’s a disconnect. I’d ascribe it to people who choose to marry in a church because of tradition or family pressures, but who are not themselves very religious. At this point I’m probably definitely going to get accused of being off topic, but just wanted to respond Markus’ second point. And reiterate my suggestion that people (male & female) from this pool would be far more likely to stay with a marriage long after the thrill of the wedding has died.

79. Markus 79

    A-L,

    Thanks for your response. To make a long story short. Yes, day care is expensive. No, kids are not that expensive. Part of my child support goes to provide the the roof over their head…which, about 40% of the time is here…which I pay for anyway. I think you see my point. Kids are expensive but to argue that I would be paying that much anyway is disingenuous. Divorce after children kills the father. I plan on looking into what political movements there are out there to make child support tax deductible, eliminate no-fault divorce, or at the very least, take child support into account when determining things like govt support (like for heat in the north).

80. JuJu 80

    This is all nice and good, but what if the very desire to have children for me hinges upon finding someone I’d want them with? And I really am not looking for anything in a man that I myself am unable to offer.

    Now, what ever makes people think men have no biological clock?? I’ve read and heard from different sources that it is more dangerous to have children with men over 35, than it is with women over that age. As with women, it is primarily their ability to conceive that declines over time, while with men, the risk of genetic defects is greater. Here is one short article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1171134.ece

    As an aside, I don’t think a girlfriend who is all of three years older quite qualifies as “an older girlfriend.” I dunno, I’d be mightily surprised if someone only a few years younger labeled me “an older woman.” :-$

81. Selena 81

    JuJu,
    I also got a kick out of Evan’s description of his gf as “older”. 3 yrs.? Sheesh–that’s nothing.

82. Jeannie 82

    Once upon a time, I was premed – genetics and reproductive biology. What I learned – half of all infertility cases are due to men and more than half of all birth defects are due to men. And the number one cause in men for both these? Age. Nature was wise to cut women off from conceiving at a certain age and tragic in not doing the same for men:-).

    Thank you Hunter and Selena.

    Really – I date 40 somethings and i am struck by how much all of them want to remarry. I’ve met not a single player in this age range. They just do not know how to get there with a woman.

83. Markus 83

    JuJu,

    My biological clock is that I simply wpouldn’t want to deal with infancy anymore. I love my boys at their ages, 6 and 9, but definitely don’t want to go through the baby thing again.

84. M 84

    What’s missing from the argument is the return on nurturing your mate grow into his/her full potential. Culturally we’ve developed impatience with everything, we want it all right now and we don’t want to work hard for it. We’ve forgotten the value of investment and shared histories.

    Bottom line: A shared life with an imperfect person isn’t settling, it’s maturity.

85. MBF 85

    At first, I was really angry and disillusioned after reading Lori Gottlieb’s article. She had every right to make her point. However, I think she left a lot of holes in her argument, which is the worst part. She didn’t seem to represent all sides, except for the friends who had alcoholic husbands, etc. and apparently it was okay to “settle” in that relationship.

    She didn’t seem to offer any solutions, advice from experts, any ray of hope. Supposedly, she was indicating that marriage shouldn’t be one-stop shopping. I agree. How can we make it less one-stop shopping? Hire prostitutes if our spouse repulses us in bed? We can afford it, he’ll be such a good provider anyway. Have designated friends to laugh and have fun with, if we don’t enjoy our spouses company? Also, I’m in my thirties and don’t feel ready to have kids, what do I do? What’s so bad about Mr. 85%? I’d love Mr. 85%. Where is he? Should I settle for Mr. 50% or 40%. That’s not made clear.Maybe, my expectations are too high both journalistically and relationship-wise.

    At the same time, as Evan says, why should we let this (sub-par, IMHO) writer’s opinion influence us? We can just as easily rebel by having a more open mind and exploring our options.

86. hunter 86

    ….”she” talk, how interesting, as a young man it would irritate me, now, it fascinates me, to hear how women use the word settle, short for, settle for less….

87. Eda 87

    I think one concept — potentially an even more depressing one – is what if the type of man or woman that you want, just doesn’t want you? The article and some of the posts, suggest that perhaps the man that women want just doesn’t exist. If he doesn’t exist, then in some ways, it might be easier to not feel so so bad that you can’t find him. But, what if he does exist — maybe lots of them do — and you are just not his cup of tea. What do you do then? Also, what happens to your ego when the guy that you “settled for” doesn’t want you either. Then what do you do? Do you go with someone you don’t really like just to have a man or just to be in a relationship?

88. Michael Ejercito 88

    Do you go with someone you don’t really like just to have a man or just to be in a relationship?

    Just be practical about it.

89. Eda 89

    Michael,

    What does just being practical look like?

90. Jeannie 90

    Dear M,

    Oy!!!!!

    I can not begin to tell you how many women have had that philosophy towards relationships. It isn’t maturity, it is masochism. Every woman I know has nurtured ad nauseum – and its not reciprocated. And I am not talking a couple of months, but years.

    It takes two to tango. It takes two who are mature and ready to work at it.

91. Margaret 91

    I can only say, as a 46-year old, divorced, childless woman who “settled” at age 22: I am so glad I do not suffer from Diaper Bag Syndrome. Around age 35, I realized my heart would not break if I never gave birth. God, how liberating that has been.

    Women who crave babies and are pushing 40 may, indeed, need to settle. As far as I am concerned, I have not found anyone in the 20 years following my divorce that I would want to live with. Even if I didn’t think I could do better than so many of the men available in my age group, I would still choose to be alone rather than wake up to the morning breath and the general day-to-day annoyances of someone I was not passionate about.

    I do find that alot of 60+ year old men are interested in me now, but I am so NOT interested.

    I think Gottlieb was likely a an entitled JAP in her heyday (my apologies to anyone here who is Jewish, including, I suspect, Evan;I am Irish Catholic and we have our own set of annoyances) who had lofty and unrealistic expectations of what a husband should be.

    Me, I know no one is perfect, including myself, but damn, I would like to find someone I am attracted to and passionate about, who has his act together, is kind and funny, and is a strong person. Jeeze…is that too much to ask?

92. Selena 92

    I’m with you Margaret. “Jeeze…is that too much to ask?” I’m also 46. I didn’t “settle” at 22, though I did have a baby at that age, and so was perhaps spared the desperation of having to have ‘someone’ to procreate with in my thirties to early 40′s. I LOVE menopause, very freeing.

    M writes, “Bottom line: A shared life with an imperfect person isn’t settling, it’s maturity.”

    I’ve yet to meet anyone who is perfect. I’m not sure I even know anyone who expects perfection.

    For me the bottom line is: Maturity is not settling for someone with whom you are mismatched, just so you can say you have someone to share your life with.

93. Michael Ejercito 93

    I LOVE menopause, very freeing.

    Menopause is the only 1005 effective method of birth control.

    (Birth control devices can fail, and women who choose abstinence or lesbianism can get raped.)

94. hunter 94

    …see,….that is what makes relationships interesting,…and sometimes fascinating….the differences in opinion, and definitions in words…such as “maturity.”……

95. hunter 95

    to Margaret,

    Have you tried dating 3 men, 3 different times?….It takes some people time to warm up to the opposite sex….

96. hunter 96

    to Jeannie

    …Maturity between 20 year olds?….even some 30 year olds…Maturity?…what is that?…..

97. Michael Ejercito 97

    At the same time, however, I believe that most American weddings occur in a church (or other house of worship). And nearly half of all marriages end in divorce. Obviousy there’s a disconnect.

    The disconnect comes from a lack of loyalty on either party.

98. verbosity 98

    I agree with something M wrote. “Bottom line: A shared life with an imperfect person isn’t settling, it’s maturity.”

    Isn’t it interesting how 100+ years ago people rarely traveled more than 200 miles from their birthplace, yet managed to find mates and spend the remainder of their lives together? Settling? Maturity? Wise? I do not know. Today we can travel the world and the US easily, often living far from our birthplaces. Yet increasingly, we cannot do what our ancestors did pretty successfully.

    I’ve seen the word ‘nurture’ used several times in the context of men being ‘nurtured’ and they somehow fail to respond. Nurture means to nurse or nourish. It also means to train or educate. Many (not all) women like to think they nourish when they really try to train or educate. They are not one and the same. I would also venture to say that to train or educate in this context would usually assume the trainer thinks they are somehow superior to the trainee. Just something to think about regarding characteristics for a successful relationship.

    Trust us, we men know we’re imperfect. We’ve been inculcated with our failings since childhood. Wouldn’t it make sense to celebrate things that ARE positive as the basis for a lasting relationship rather than lamenting we do not measure up to one’s standards (which are ever-changing)?

99. Mike Paahana 99

    b/c those girls no can get better and they r head cases but is good b/c u find dat kine and u can fool aroun with them an they buy u all kine stuff

100. Margaret 100

     Hunter,

     Yes, I generally give a guy three dates minimum to see if chemistry develops, unless he is repulsive or psycho or exhibits some other red flag-type behavior.

     I am not saying there are not quality men in my age group, I am just saying they are hard to find. I am not looking for Brad Pitt, Bill Gates, and Ghandi rolled into one, but I do expect to meet someone who is kind, financially stable (not rich), responsible, doesn’t have a substance abuse problem, and doesn’t live with Mommy. And yes, I expect to be attracted to him. That is somenthing that is entirely subjective;another woman my find my taste abominable.

     If this is too much to ask, God help us and what does it say about American men? I am not asking for anything I myself do not offer.

     I’m sure the guys who post here are great, and Hunter I have enjoyed your posts, so please do not anyone take my comments personally.

     I think there are some great people out there, it is just tough to connect in today’s society.

101. Margaret 101

     Jeannie,

     Actually you framed everything I believe far more articulately than I could. Great post, especially the part about the underpinnings of sexism. We really need to give men more credit than we do. Unfortunately, some women are so desperate for a man and to s*** out a couple of kids that they overlook substandard behavior and treatment.

     I also agree with you about there being many nice men who cannot creat a spark because they do not know how. Truthfully, the players we read about who are only interested in the young, hot chicks are in the minority. Most of the men I meet (that don’t have dealbreakers like living with Mommy or substance abusers, etc.) are decent and sincerely looking for companionship.

     It’s just a matter of connecting with one of these “nice” men and feeling the chemistry. I know many women can compromise on that if he is nice, but I can’t. But then again, I don’t want children(at least not my own), so that puts me in a totally different mindset.

102. m 102

     “Wouldn’t it make sense to celebrate things that ARE positive as the basis for a lasting relationship rather than lamenting we do not measure up to one’s standards (which are ever-changing)?”

     Why, yes, it would.

     That’s why it seems so strange that with regard to that, you NEVER take your own advice.

103. verbosity 103

     M,

     Sweetie, your snarky reply still doesn’t answer my point about the ‘nourishing’ versus ‘training.’ I suspect any marginally rational reader knows where you fall on that line….

104. question for paul 104

     Paul quoted the Bible again, saying: “The bible puts it another way men love your wives, wives respect your husbands (Eph 5:33) – BOTH are unconditional (key women have a harder time with that concept then men do respect should not be something that is earnedit is as unconditional as love) . In short, we are to do certain things as men and women in a relationship and if we do, we’ll be successful.

     Why is there a double standard in the Bible that says women need to respect their husbands but men need only to love their wives?

     When you say respect, does that mean if a woman’s husband is a philanderer, or an alcoholic, or an abuser, a money launderer, a thief, a compulsive gambler…that she STILL needs to respect him? How does that work?

     See, when I think of people I “respect”, I think of people who have done things or have qualities that I hold in some esteem. I can’t unconditionally turn off my ability to NOT respect someone who hasn’t earned my respect any more than I have the ability to stop breathing. People don’t respect by turning a switch on or off in themselves. Respect is a person’s automatic response to someone that has done something to impress them. Do you think, Paul, that women have the ability to MAKE themselves feel respect for a person?

     I find your take on matters fascinating, Paul. Please elaborate.

     And btw, I don’t mean to insult you, but I wonder, when you say:
     “In short, we are to do certain things as men and women in a relationship and if we do, we’ll be successful,” with all seriousness, why hasn’t that worked for you? Have women failed to respect you in the past and is that why your relationships have been unsuccessful til now?

105. JerseyGirl 105

     Well, I don’t know why a man would want to be “settled” for by a woman choosing to be with him anyway.

     I think times have changed and while women might not have as long a shelf life as men, even though both genders age, we by far have more options and a longer shelf life then ever before. And men’s is a little shorter. It has been scientifically proven that with age, men also “decrease” healthwise. A man’s sperm at 20 is much more healthy then a man’s sperm at 40 and could equally be cause for birth defects in a baby just as much as a woman who is 40 having a baby does.

     Also, women have set higher standards on looks then they use to. Women want to be attracted to their partner. Women also don’t need men to support them like they once did, which opens up lots more options for women.

     However, as a 26 year old girl, I have often had older men hit on me and have not been interested at all. Why would I want to date someone in their 40s if someone who is 40 doesn’t even want to date someone in their 40s? There are many young, handsome, successful men my age around too have to settle for a 40 year old guy.

106. JuJu 106

     I once saw this quote by Maureen Dowd that just made me stop in my tracks, as it described a lot of my “relationships” so aptly:
     The minute you settle for less than you deserve, you get even less than you settled for.

     How profound is this?

107. verbosity 107

     The following doesn’t apply to all women.

     Maureen Dowd – The minute you settle for less than you deserve, you get even less than you settled for.

     Maureen Dowd – The same genius who gave us “Are Men Necessary?”

     Of course, one could aske the same question in reverse and see if that advances better communication between the sexes…. but I digress.

     JuJu, I do not attempt to skewer you, but I do think your point is off. BTW, my use of the word ‘you’ is not personally directed at JuJu, but in general.

     You do not deserve anything from the opposite sex simply by being a woman, having a vagina & breasts. Conversely, man deserves nothing from women simply because he has a penis & testicles. Same thing for respect. I respect no one, woman or man, simply by virtue of their gender. They have to EARN it. Same thing for what you deserve. You deserve what you earn from the opposite sex in the dating arena. If you aren’t getting what you think you are worth in the dating world, perhaps it is the marketplace’s way of telling you you do not deserve what you think you are worth.

     Consider you own a house. You wish to sell it. So you get a realtor, and put it on the market. It may be priced more than similar homes in the neighborhood, It may be the same or less. No offers come. So you paint a couple of rooms, rearrange furniture, and plant additional flowers in the yard. Still no offers come. So you drop the price 1%. Still no offers come. But you protest “My house is worth X! I’ve paid Y, I’ve painted, landscaped, decorated well” So you ask your realtor for feedback from the few who have toured the home. You are told the yard is too maintenance-intensive, the plumbing needs work, the roof needs work, the appliances are outdated, the yard backs against a big street, the school district isn’t great, there’s no fireplace, some don’t like the paint, and the HVAC system needs revamping.

     You realtor tells you that there could be an offer, but it would be far less than what you think your house is worth, because it needs to take into account these issues with the home.

     Simply put, your home’s value isn’t the same to buyers as what you think it worth. Your expectation, and therefore, paradigm, of its value is therefore unreasonable. See the analogy?

108. Margaret 108

     I am new to this website and must say I truly enjoy the dialogue here, finding it to be of a higher caliber than most “dating” or “singles” sites.

     Some background: married at 22, divorced at 28, very immature, very late bloomer, kind of a free spirit who moved around a lot and did not want to be tied down to a conventional marriage and kids. Didn’t really like myself and feel comfortable with myself until 40…which unfortunatetely is the age at which most of the *quality* men are indeed married, and likely to remain so.

     A couple of things have come to mind. I am 46, divorced, no children, and probably more physically attractive than most women my age. I also earn six figures, am fun , and kind and decent. That said, I don’t kid myself that I can compete with a 25 year-old or even 35 year-old in *many* dating arenas.

     I must qualify this. Much as I think Evan is great, I think his viewpoint is that of someone who lives in LA (I think he also lived in NYC) I have a sister who lives out there (LA) and it is a very, very different world from where I live, Middle America, Cleveland, Ohio. When I look around (and I am very social, plus I meet many doctors, research scientists, movers and shakers in my job)…..I see very few supermodels and studs. Most of the men, and women are *average*, and they are almost always with someone of similar physical attractiveness( and age) In fact, the women I know who are in fulfilling relationships/marriages are *less* attractive than me, i.e., do not have the time due to work, family, child-rearing, housework, etc. to take care of themselves. And I see almost *no* cases where the hubby is exchanging the wife for a younger model. Particularly here in Cleveland, a *lot* of the women, and men, are overweight. It’s those long winters and gray skies, which cause people to seek comfort food.

     I guess what I am trying to say is much depends on where you live and the mores and the mindset. In LA, NYC, even Chicago, yes, the competition is steep. Particularly if you are one who frequents nightclubs or other superficial, highly-charged venues to meet members of the opposite sex. But hey, that’s not me.

     I would be thrilled to meet a man who is financially responsible, fun, and with whom I share an attraction. I don’t even care if he makes as much as me, is short,, balding, a tad overweight. The only thing I will NOT compromise on is smoking. Will not be with a smoker, even if he is JFK JR incarnate and promises to quit.

     I have to say that when I am *truly* being honest with myself, I’d probably like to find a married man who is bored in his marriage, with whom I share a strong passion but no expectations, to see a couple of times a month. There *is* something to be said for not having to share the daily grind with someone. Alas, my Catholic parents did too good a job with me, and I doubt I could get past the moral aspect.

     All of this is long-winded way of sayng, that yes, I am probably choosing to stay single. People are allowed to want what they want, and I would rather be alone than with someone with whom I do not share passion. The thought of having to wake up to Elmer Fudd’s morning breath and washing the skidmarks out of his underwear is just a *bit* too much for me to bear.

     I am really enjoying the discussion here!

109. hunter 109

     to margaret,

     …there are many, many men that don’t know how to create attraction in a woman…..

110. Mike 110

     I’m happily married for 24 years, a man, and I see the issue very diffently. The issue to me isn’t settling or finding your true love. The issue is knowing what you are living for, and how to be happy. A happy person is grateful to his or her spouse for the good they recieve. They are not busy complaining about what they are missing. Glass half full… There is a certain affection and a certain loyalty and then its all about how gratefull you are willing to be for the good you enjoy in life and the good your spouse does for you. Without this, marriage and all relationships and all of life suffers. All I hear from these types of articles is that many Americans are spoiled and unhappy people. No wonder they don’t know how to appreciate a spouse or life itself…

111. Mike 111

     BTW, this doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t have basic compatibility, just that you have to be wise about what is essential and what is just a bonus. My take is that even relationships between essentially compatible people , very often today are destroyed by ingratitude and unhappiness.

112. m 112

     Mike –

     Your advice is wise and profound and clearly comes from the depth of experience. Thank you for it.

     So, as you have proved yourself wise, in the quest for wisdom on relationship issues, I have a question for you. A hypothetical, if you will.

     (And this is NOT SARCASTIC. I would really appreciate a response.)

     Your wife asks you to fix the roof of your shared house, as you have both observed that it needs fixing and that damage and disaster are imminent if the roof isn’t fixed.

     (In previous discussions between the two of you about domestic responsibilities, the two of you have already agreed that roof maintenance is something that falls into your area.)

     You ignore her.

     She asks you again the following weekend.

     You say something along the lines of “I’ll get to it when I get to it.”

     The season is moving along toward winter, so there is an increased probability of damage to the roof — and therefore, to the entire house — because of the added weight of accumulated snow on the roof.

     She says to you the following weekend, in a raised voice, “D**n it, Mike! We agreed that roof maintenance was your responsibility! We agreed weeks ago that the roof needs fixing! It’s going to be winter soon! When are you going to get the roof fixed?!?”

     Is she nagging? “Ungrateful” and “spoiled” for not appreciating the other positive things you bring to the relationship?

     Or is there an alternative explanation — any alternative explanation at all — for her behavior?

113. Mike 113

     m,
     In the case you mention:
     1. I am wrong for neglecting my responsibilities
     2. She is wrong for the way she expressed herself
     3. I am more wrong than she and should man up and do my job without making an issue of the way she expressed herself.
     4. I should just do it already
     5. If this is an unusual occurance for her, she is not a nag. A nag is when she tries to control many many things this way. If she is frequently expressing herself with such hostility, and over inconsequential things, she is a nag.

114. vlh 114

     1. Maybe the 40 year old woman, if she is financially independent and biologically able to do so, should go ahead and have the kid first, & worry about finding Mr. Right later. Not everyone finds love-marriage-kids all in that order. Maybe kid, then love, then marriage. Or maybe marriage-kid-divorce and then love?

     2. Match.com (and other dating sites are just as guilty) needs to change the kids options on their profile form to include “have kids already, but willing to have more with the right partner”. Right now “not sure” is the closest they get on the questionnaire. I can only assume that a man with 1 child already and “not sure” about having more is choosing that option b/c he doesn’t want to preclude having more kids (in case his partner wants one) but he isn’t desperate to reproduce, since he already has at least one of his own. This is also a good category of men for the 35 to 45 group of women to date. 35 to 45 women probably should just skip over the guys who want kids “someday”, as these guys are apparently not wanting kids immediately, and don’t want the pressures of reproducing right away with an older mate who is on borrowed time (reproductively speaking). Really, Match.com and the other sites should come up with more informative options on this section of their questionnaires.

     I’m 39, and a bit ambivalent about having children anyway, so it isn’t a big deal for me. But I can understand the point of view of other women my age who are maybe more interested in having children than I would be. I have to agree with JerseyGirl’s point about men’s sperm being kaput after a while. There is a strong correlation between risk of autism in your kids and the age of the father. Ideally, you should all get yourselves a 25 year old sperm donor, and find someone your own age, or close to it, to love later (unless 25 y/o sperm donor is hot, fun to be with and has his own car and a job…)

     I also have to agree with Margaret, that in the middle part of the country, most men over 35 are very overweight, and much less likely to exercise and diet than the women around here. It’s hard to be attracted to someone who looks like a lump. I’m 39 and am skinny b/c of good genes and, well, I’m also vegetarian and eat lots of vegetables b/c my dad is an obsessive gardener (so I’m always getting free meals that happen to be low in fat). I just can’t see myself with a 240 pound guy, and most guys my age are that weight now.

     Last summer, I was standing in line at the Harry Potter book release party (at a bookstore I won’t name). I saw a guy I thought I knew: it was a guy I went through school with and had not seen since we graduated in 1986. He used to be on the swim team in high school, went to the Olympic trials, and had (if I recall correctly) an athletic scholarship for college. Now, his belly hangs over his belt. That was a BIG shock!!

115. Jared Meyer 115

     Well written. We’re all fighting biology whether or not we realize it. I’m male, nearly 30, and never wanted to have children. However, something compels me to get online and see who’s seen my profile. Biology! I enjoy being alone and don’t need a companion, but it would be nice. Nevertheless, I’m compelled to get back online because it’s convenient. I’m fighting biology and want out of the human race. Nobody comes first!

116. pcw 116

     The basic imbalance is obvious. men can procreate well into their 40s, 50s, 60s and beyond. Women can’t, biologically speaking. So yes if a man is looking for a wife AND a mother, he is much more likely to pick a younger woman. Those are the facts. The point is for me, been there done that. don’t want anymore kids, don’t want to get married again but would love to have a fun-loving companion. No he doesn’t have to look like Brad Pitt but it would be nice if he was semi attractive. And yes he has to have a job, no freeloaders. so no I am not going to settle anymore. And yes I like being alone. And no I do not lie about my age, it’s 50! I am the exception rather than the rule but I don’t mind being different. I like myself the way I am. If someone else happens to like me the way I am, that’s a bonus.

117. Jack 117

     I have to agree with Evan for the most part regarding his defense to Lor’s article. However, I am 39 with a six-figure income and a former fitness model (which I can still hold up to any 22 year old guy out there). I have to disagree with this comment with regards to what most 40 year old women are going to get in theie dating inbox: “Commitmentphobes. Players. Financially unstable guys. Unattractive guys. Socially awkward guys. Much younger guys. Much older guys”. While this may be the norm, and “us” successful guys around my age do tend to look for women between 25-35, there are those women 40 and over who fit what we are looking for. I do want my own children and consider a 30 year old over a 40 year old being the ideal, however, I met an amazing women several months ago who is now my girlfriend and she is pushing 42. I probably would have never looked at her twice because of her age and my desire to have several children, but opened the door with an open mind and now we most likely will be getting married next year. I do agree with her being older that the dating process has excellerated, but I have dated many younger women and not one could give me the commitment that I needed, nor the love that I was looking for.

     So holding out for someone you fall in love with is so much better than settling for mediocrity. Just ask my girlfriend! And as we grow old together, we will have what is really important: Friendship. Loyalty. Patience. Values. Compromise.

     And hopefully a couple kids!

118. Nervous Nellie 118

     Jack and Markus,

     So, there ARE men like you close to my age I am 44 years old. I started seeing a 26-year-old man last September, and this was supposed to be a casual relationship. Recently he wanted to try a full-blown one. He has claimed not to want children, of which he was convinced after I had gotten pregnant (but miscarried after 6 weeks), but one never knows if this issue will pop up.

     I do want to give this a chance, but many on these threads believe that one closer to my own age would be better. So at least there are men out there, closer to my age….who are like you…

119. Margaret 119

     Jack,

     You make a great point. Bottom line, it is not so much whether someone is a “catch” or “trophy”, but whether you *love* them. That is what is worth holding out for.

     Thank God I don’t want kids. I feel that gives me a lot more leeway and means I don’t have to settle. I hope I can find someone around my age (46) who has already done the whole Diaper Bag deal, so won’t be as interested in the women 15-20 years younger. And oh, I am so sick of 60+ year-old men hitting on me.

120. JerseyGirl 120

     In my dating experiences, I am 26, I have met alot of men that feel their own biological clock ticking more then me (30-40 year olds) and seemed to be pushing for that type of stuff more then me. Like Margeret, I am not sure I ever want children and am not overly concerned. I would however like a good guy who I can really love and could really love me.

     Women don’t need men to take care of them anymore so women don’t need to settle for a guy that is in his 40s and past his prime. And both men and women are in their prime in their 20s-30s. And with fathers having to take a more active role in their kid’s life, having an energentic 30 year old man running after children is much more perfered then having a 40 year old man doing it. The only case I can see where a woman would pick an older man is if he is very successful and makes money. Otherwise, why would a woman pick a man that is both past his prime and poor, for the most part.

     And to be honest, a man stuck in a frat boy mentality isn’t attractive to a woman of any age. And while men can procreate well into their 70s….the real question is should the be? I think the answer is no. That isn’t responsible on his part. All around, younger men and women having babies is perfered. And women having more options today, are much more able to pick men based on looks, age and money then any other time in history.

121. Kelly 121

     Mike, mike, mike- why are you already married, and where can i find another who thinks as you do? better yet, you need to teach men classes on the true meaning of commitment & how to achieve a marriage built on mutual love & respect. just 2 cents from a financially well-off, attractive, childless 43 yr old divorced-&-looking-but-disillusioned-thus-far-woman-who-is-about to-settle…..

122. hunter 122

     to Jerseygirl,

     You have met men whose biological clock is ticking? That is a new line, if I ever heard one. You must be a very pretty, attractive woman. Mostly men will marry your type, because they know that if they don’t, someone else will.

123. hunter 123

     to Kelly,

     My married male friends say they meet more single women now, than when they were single themselves.

124. hunter 124

     to Margaret,

     I agree with you about loving someone enough to marry. But, for all practical purposes, can we really tell the difference(love or infatuation, or just plain hots) when we are in our prime?

125. JerseyGirl 125

     Hunter:
     “You have met men whose biological clock is ticking? That is a new line, if I ever heard one. You must be a very pretty, attractive woman. Mostly men will marry your type, because they know that if they don’t, someone else will.”
     ————————————————————————–

     I’m a cute girl but not super hot like you might be thinking. And yes, I have met guys that are basically worried about their own biological clock. Of course this is figuratively as men don’t have a biological clock biologically. But I have known alot of men that don’t want to wait until they are 40-50 to start familes and were feeling the burn. Aging is something that happens to all of us and I know men are just as insecure about aging as women, even if men are less judged for it typically.

126. A-L 126

     Yes, Hunter, there are guys whose biological clocks are ticking. Many of the single men I’ve dated (or known) who are in their 30s or 40s and haven’t had kids yet seem to be more concerned about the kids part than the married part. This is a group that I suspect would definitely settle, as they mention their desire for kids often. One guy I dated said that his biggest problem was that he was 33 and unmarried with no kids. Another guy I was talking to today talked about how he really wants to get married because he wants to have a couple of kids. These are the men (along with Lori Gottlieb’s women) who are just looking for someone to procreate with. I strongly suspect that they’re not looking for perfection, but someone who is able to have kids, would be a good mother, and is at least somewhat interested in them. Once you meet these requirements, they’d be down on one knee and ready to propose.

127. Selena 127

     I’ve also known men like A-L described. The one’s I knew were all under 40 and their *clock* was wanting to have kids while they were still young enough to play with them. And I also got the impression they would “settle” without falling deeply in love, quite quickly in order to procreate. It’s not just a female thing.

128. Bluto 128

     It might sound cold, but the truth is that what evan is saying is right.

     also the fact that many women (and men) have elevated expectations ESPECIALLY because of online dating. People on jdate in particular have a motto of “never settle”. Thats fine and good in a realistic context but what happens when you raise the bar to some unrealistic level because of some imaginary ideal mate created that only exists in your head. Most people online at first probably feel like a “supermarket” of potential mates until and if reality sets in and you find that these are just the same people you meet everyday, just online.

     I’ve noticed that people new to online dating, and younger women in general (men too) have unrealistic raised expectations and the idea of “never settling” is good if your ideal mate is a realistic ideal.

     people should not be chasing a mirage in the desert thier whole lives only to turn 50 and find out they have been chasing nothing but sand.

     While it also might be unpopular to say so, some women and men will have to settle if they want this due to thier own lack of value as a mate. there is a mate for everyone but do you really think an obese woman will find a young handsome guy with a good job? or that 40 year old dungeons and dragons geek living in his mother’s basement will find the supermodel he you know whats to?

     hell no.

     the cold hard facts are that people need to look at themselves in a mirror as well and base thier “ideal” mate on something that is a realistic attainable goal. some people have legitimate options, others will be forced to settle for a mirror image of themselves. It all depends on what you bring to the table.

129. Michael Ejercito 129

     Most people online at first probably feel like a supermarket of potential mates until and if reality sets in and you find that these are just the same people you meet everyday, just online.

     The difference, of course, is that the people online are available .

     Most of the women I meet already have boyfriends.

130. steve 130

     I read Jeannie’s comment, and after her honest admission, I think any man living in a major city would be an absolute fool to get married these days. Like Steve, I also live in the DC area. If you want to see something VERY funny, but also sad, go to bars in Old Town Alexandria or georgetown, and watch women hang out at places where guys who own boats hang out. That’s an obvious sign of being rich. I was at a bar with lots of rich men yesterday,a nd you would see these women shamelessly not even bother to hide their interest only in money. I’m in a profession that one typically would presume one makes a lot of money, I don’t, though I make good money, and I would see women just go up to guys and ask immediately “what do you do?” and walk away if the guy had a non high paying field of work. Because I’m a lawyer, they keep on asking away questions to determine how long I’ve been working so they can figure out how much money I make. They have it down to a science to figure out the amount of income/status you have. IN some areas, like NYC, women will just straight up ask you how much money you make and walk away if they don’t like the answer. It’s a really sad state of affairs. it seems that in major cities, that being insecure, and doing the things insecure people do, boast, actually gets you women, whereas in other areas, you’d think that being so insecure would repell them. You’d do much better (at least getting sex) if you said “I make a lot of money, wanna see my Aston Martin?” Sure, you’d be used like an ATM though… I pity anyone guy who is trying to find a real relationship in DC. It simply isn’t realistic given how materialistic and status oriented the people are here.

     I’m sure anyone in DC will know that the first two questions people ask you here is “where are you from, and what do you do?” given that the highly transient population is so into status and presumes that nobody is actually from here.

131. Angela Crisp 131

     Dear Steve. On marriage: what’s the old saying “Fools rush in where others dare not tread.” lol. As for women looking for a rich man, I assure you that men do the same thing. I make very good money in a predominately male field. It is hard for me to even get past hello with men because of the work issue. The tactics are largely the same, so I know it is not just a casual question. When I was younger, I was quite poor, and on the other receiving end of the same question. I tend to stick with men in a similar income range, but don’t rule out dating other people because money does not define passion or happiness. If women EVER treats you like a meal ticket, it is time to move on. It is the same for me. Try just not answering questions like these. When men as ask me what I do, I often reply “goof off, TG it pays,” and let them ask again later when we know each other better. You really aren’t obligated to say, and if a woman insists, your radar goes off, and you shove off. Hope this is helpful. Best regards, AC

132. steve 132

     I think men are far more forgiving when it comes to income than women are. I’ve dated women who have been unemployed and living with their parents, where I know I simply wouldn’t be able to date had I been unemployed and living with my parents. You can deny it all you like, but women tend to date same income level or higher. I’ve made a lot more money than the women I’ve dated. The women who make as much as I do date/are married to guys that make a lot more money than I do. Coincidence? I don’t think so. I know many guys who are married and their wives made a lot less, or quit working. Do you know any female lawyers that would date male cashiers at supermarkets? I don’t, but I know male lawyers that date female cashiers.

133. steve 133

     Michael, could you elaborate on your comment? I tried online dating a bit, never was very successful at it, I do better in person. What I have found, and other guys i know who tried it, is that there are only a couple kinds of women that do online dating:

     (1) serious basket cases
     (2) women looking to find mr. perfect and have a huge laundry list of requirements
     (3) women who have no intention of going on a date, but post ads to get a self esteem boost by getting 100 responses in a day
     (4) tiny minority of women who actually want a relationship

134. Angela Crisp 134

     Steve: It seems you have so many stereotypes about women in your head, you fail to see the trees for the forest. All your criticism could just as easily be applied to men online. Unfortunately, if I did the same thing you have apparently done, I would never get a get to meet someone in person from an online contact either. You need to let go of your assumptions, strengthen your appreciation of yourself, and take control of your online experiences. Blanket judgments won’t get you a date this Saturday night. You are clearly articulate and intelligent. Decide you have the right stuff to achieve your goal of meeting a woman who does not fit into the criteria you outline above (perhaps with the exception of #4). I’ve had to reorganize my own attitudes about men to keep finding the good ones out there. I think you can do the same. Good luck. Best regards, AC

135. Angela Crisp 135

     Steve, on your financial concerns meeting women. Most women do not make as much as men do, and very very few make an income like mine. This may encourage them to seek out a relationship to solve their problems. You can avoid it, just be giving women no information. If they are looking for the wrong reasons, it will become clear remarkably fast. Since I make a high income, if I insisted on dating men with a higher income, I would have eliminated a value pool of wonderful men to date. I, for one, would never want to do that. I think you should value yourself beyond the income, and see to it that you only date women who do the same. Money matters because everyone needs some just to survive. You have the mother wit to tell the difference, just apply the skill, and insist a woman value you as a person before letting them in on your business. Best regards, AC

136. vino 136

     I’ve read some other threads on here regarding the issues of money and dating and marriage. I’d have to say that my experience also mirrors Steve’s. I also saw some posters in other threads point to articles and surveys where a large majority of women do seek men who earn more. See also the thread on here re: Women Who Earn More Than Men…

     I don’t think Steve is making blanket judgments about or stereotyping all women. I think he accurately describes the majority. I also suspect he is more than a little tired of it. You’ve seen more than a little frustration from many male posters (primarily) regarding the time, effort, and expense of slogging through all of this.

     Angela, I do like your attitude as a successful woman who will date men who earn less. However, it’s my experience that women who do earn more still seek men who earn even more than they. This is explored more fully in the thread I mentioned above.

     A poster there did have an interesting point regarding why women seek men who earn more: their options. They can continue to work or not, they can have kids or not, they can get additional education or not, all the while their standard of living does not fall.

     Women generally don’t ‘marry down’ in income. Exceptions exist, but they are few and far between in my experience.

     The problem is, as many, many posters have pointed out in this thread and others, is in divorce court. I don’t wish a divorce court discussion, but let’s just say it is not favorable to the higher earner (no matter the sex). Ask Paul McCartney!

137. hunter 137

     If I don’t date women that ask me what I do for a living or annual earnings(I have had but one, ask this question) I would be dateless all my life. Women know that men relate to their jobs, they want to know how we bring home the “bacon.” They want to know what type of “hunters” we are…..We can answer these questions, tactfully, more so in a bar type atmosphere…

138. Michael Ejercito 138

     Steve,

     Most women that I meet out there in public already have boyfriends.

139. hunter 139

     I like to play with women sometimes, ’cause some of them, that is there opening line, “where are you from.” I might say, “from my mother, don’t you know where people come from?”

140. hunter 140

     to Michael,

     try asking women that are not as “sexy.” Good looking women always have boyfriends, some women have a waiting line of guys. Until you get good at meeting, then, go for what you want.

141. Angela Crisp 141

     Hunter, you humor in the last post is much appreciated, lol. But no one has to answer a question, it is a date — not a grand jury, lol. As for your being a “hunter” bringing home the bacon, the argument is now circular, and as a man you define yourself according to your income. If you don’t want to be treated like a paycheck, don’t act like one. I think most women want a lover who they can trust and respect, but if one happens to want something else, I would move on.

142. Collins 142

     “If you don’t want to be treated like a paycheck, don’t act like one.”

     Thank you, Angela, for telling that to the guys. Just like I tell the ladies, “If you don’t want to be treated like a trophy/object…” It goes both ways. If you want to be valued for a certain quality, emphasize that quality.

143. amanda 143

     By my experience, the women who are most insistent on dating men with money tend to pair off with the men most insistent on dating women with the best looks, thus effectively canceling each other out of the dating pool.

     I am a European woman living in a town with a university, so no educated women I know expect the man to pay for everything. I agree that it’s too much to expect of a partner.

144. A-L 144

     I will not deny that most women are interested to know that a man is financially stable and can support himself. I also know that there are woman who run after men in certain professions (doctor, lawyer, etc) because they think of them as having high salaries.

     I do not think, however, that asking about a man’s job is necessarily always done because of financial curiosity. A person’s job is usually how they spend at least a third of their day, if not more, and many are very passionate about their work. In addition, I get asked this question by men all the time. Does that mean they’re golddiggers? (And no, I don’t think they are.) But I do realize that some men are quite sensitive about the topic and therefore will only ask about it if they bring it up first, or on a second or third date.

145. hunter 145

     to Angela Crisp,

     Yes, move on, I agree with you…

146. vino 146

     I’ve re-read many of the previous posts. Some shock me.

     Jeannie#61 – “My childless girlfriends are looking to settle for a sperm bank – again, the men involved have no clue – and I know how that will end as that was once me.”

     Not picking on Jeannie at all. Love the honesty. But it occurred to me that women who desire children do not need a guy or to ‘settle’ to have children. Lori Gottleib lived this, putting ‘her money where her mouth is’ so to speak.

     So why settle to have kids? Lori Gottleib wrote, So if you rarely see your husband but he’s a decent guy who takes out the trash and sets up the baby gear, and he provides a second income that allows you to spend time with your child instead of working 60 hours a week to support a family on your own how much does it matter whether the guy you marry is The One?

     As a guy, the above paragraph is quite scary. I also thinks it gives men short shrift in the discussion. I think Vebosity & Hadley Paige adequately state the concerns I have regarding this.

     Doers anyone care to address this?

147. amanda 147

     I think most of us agree it gives men short shrift in the discussion. I’m interested to hear if Gottlieb addressed the downplaying of men’s roles during her public appearance, Evan.

148. cinnamon 148

     vino,

     Sorry, I do not have time to read the whole thread so I may have missed some important input. Here is my few cents, and I’m only speaking for myself.

     Now, I don’t mind being called conservative but in my perception of family, the woman man relationship is the primary one, children being the fruit of it (or not, not every couple can have own children). Such constellation and a healthy relationship between the man and the woman provide a home which I would wish for my future children. Ideally, it should also prevent divorce when the children are about to leave the nest.
     This is a matter of personal philosophy (not connected to any religion) which helps to navigate in a reality which, to be honest, puts an enormous pressure on women to get married and have children by certain age.

     Now I’m a woman in my early 30ies, educated, unmarried, no children and on a good way to become professionally accomplished.
     I must admit, statements like the one you cited sound just as scary to me as I imagine must sound to a man.

149. vino 149

     Now I would think that cinnamon’s perception of family would be the ideal (and should be norm). Kudos, cinnamon, BTW. What is unsettling to me is that the, I’ll call it ‘baby first mentality’ seems far more prevalent than cinnamon’s. If that is so, then it seems that verbosity and hadley paige are right – that the risks of marriage in this context are too great. As a guy, I find that very distressing.

150. cinnamon 150

     to vino again,

     Without trying to justify the, what you call it, baby first mentality I would like to add one more dimension to it.
     First of all, typically if a woman wishes to get solid education and some work experience before having a baby (for example in order to be economically independent, to name just one of the reasons) she is shrinking the time span where she actually can have this baby to just a few years. If she hasn’t found a loving and reliable partner who also wishes a family by that time, she suddenly gets under a lot of pressure which she needs to handle. People handle the pressures of life in ways which are better and worse

     One of the ways to handle the baby pressure is to say that one of the best things you can offer your (unborn) children is parents who have a good relation to each other.

151. hunter 151

     to Collins,

     I have heard women say, “taking money away from men is easy.” Women that said this had a “sexy” figure.

152. hunter 152

     to Angela,

     I have been told, “There is no one trustworthy.” People have to build trust with time.

153. vino 153

     to cinnamon,

     Not to be a cynical bastard, but I’m going to be…

     ” . . . typically if a woman wishes to get solid education and some work experience before having a baby (for example in order to be economically independent, to name just one of the reasons) she is shrinking the time span where she actually can have this baby to just a few years.”

     Background assumption is settling for a guy to have a family.

     A bunch of questions: Why bother working? If you are going to take 3-5 years off, you are essentially unmarketable, and have to start over again. Some rare exceptions exist but they are very rare.

     “If she hasn’t found a loving and reliable partner who also wishes a family by that time, she suddenly gets under a lot of pressure which she needs to handle.”

     Begs the question – if she wants the family (children), why doesn’t she do it? Go do ‘turkey baster.’ Why should she settle indeed? She doesn’t need a man for that. My point and one other posters raised is that she wants a guy to help with the things of daily life, to help her fulfill her wishes. See Verbosity’s #47, quoting Lori Gottleib. The problem is, as Verbosity indicated, there’s no benefit to a guy, but there is tremendous benefit to the woman and kid(s).

     The big point there is that SHE needs to handle the pressure. It’s not some guy’s responsibility to handle it. Additionally, if she makes the CHOICE to work for x years, thereby cutting into her best child-rearing years, that is HER responsibility to accept.

     Sometimes you can’t have it all when you want it.

     “One of the ways to handle the baby pressure is to say that one of the best things you can offer your (unborn) children is parents who have a good relation to each other.”

     My point is that it is less likely for the parents to have a good relationship, particularly if she thinks she settled. She won’t respect him, won’t be affectionate to him, and is more likely to divorce him later. It’s also important to note the baby pressure is her creation, with only the rarest exceptions.

     Not to be too negative, but I don’t see where any of this thread’s premise benefits guys on the whole. Verbosity, though wordy, makes a good case. I’d avoid these women like the plague.

154. cinnamon 154

     vino,
     I explained my view on the concept of settling in #148 (I hope clearly and unambiguously).
     Yes, I agree with you that if one of the couple thinks she/he settled, they are more likely to divorce later on. Same can happen later, if a couple do not take enough care about their relationship and make their children the only thing they have in common, I think they are more likely to experience crisis when the children are about to leave home.

     “The big point there is that SHE needs to handle the pressure. It’s not some guy’s responsibility to handle it. Additionally, if she makes the CHOICE to work for x years, thereby cutting into her best child-rearing years, that is HER responsibility to accept.

     Sometimes you can’t have it all when you want it. ”

     Yes, sometimes you just cannot predict what life has in there for you, you need to make choices based on quite high uncertainty and accept the consequences.

     Vino, I don’t think we are in disagreement on any of the points which you raised in comment to my post.

155. vino 155

     Who’s disagreeing?

156. cinnamon 156

     ufff… I thought you’re in the mood for some boxing today. I’m not

157. vino 157

     No. No boxing. Mud wrestling.

158. vino 158

     Is that with our w/o bikini?
     LOL

159. cinnamon 159

     this needs to wait for a thread about flirting LOL

160. vino 160

     Why wait? We’re only on this rock once!

161. cinnamon 161

     so, you’re a flirt undercover Charming

162. vino 162

     Undercovers? Now who’s flirting?

163. cinnamon 163

     you made my day but we’re a bit off topic

164. vino 164

     Doh!

     Agreed. Uh, what was the topic?

165. cinnamon 165

     I guess this one is exhausted:

     but there is a wide selection of topics to choose among:
     - Why Would a Younger Woman Want to Date a Much Older Man? (this we know already)
     - Should Women Ask Men Out on First Dates?
     - and there is an old one: What Happens When You Don’t Trust Your Judgment in Relationships?. I missed it. Maybe it’s worth reading?

166. vino 166

     Hmmmm.

     The first 2 bore me.

     I’ll take a look at the 3rd. Maybe I’ll post something good for ya!

167. cinnamon 167

     Looking forward to it. The question sounds intriguing, but I haven’t read the content, yet…

168. vino 168

     CinnamonApr 8th 2008 at 08:09 am 163

     ” you made my day:-) ”

     Wait till tonight!

169. A-L 169

     While I was working today two 14-year olds told me that I should find a guy and marry him now instead of waiting around because otherwise I won’t like any of my future choices and I’ll have to marry a really old guy (I just turned 28). Of course, they also think I’m younger than I am. But I still found it interesting that teenagers would be giving the same advice as some of the adults noted in this thread and had to share.

170. Sayanta 170

     a-l-

     Maybe they’ve been reading this blog. ;-p

171. larry 171

     Settling is simply the wrong word. It should be “Knowing what really matters vs pie in the sky dreams of perfection.” The irony here is that i think if both sexes did this there would be fewer bitter losers around in the later years. Why? Because in the past of so many bitter losers is a relationship that went south because the other person had unrealistic expectations. That’s what turns them into bitter losers.

172. Courtney 172

     RSL said it best – I couldn’t agree more.

173. MSL 173

     The funny thing is that most women I hear saying that they will never settle are not that smart, attractive or likable (not to mention that they may be financially unstable and come with a slew of emotional baggage). It makes me wonder if they ever realized that the guys they date just might be settling themselves.

174. Tia 174

     as a woman i can cosign ( agree) with Ms. Gottlieb’s article. and it doesn’t even boil down to if you just wnt ch ildren you  might want to settle. If you want to get married to a decent quality guy period, you might want to revise your list of qualities in a man. at 31 i am noticing that dating isn’t what it was when i was younger. ok dating has never  been easy persay, but the men don’t get smarter and more mature , or more focused and likely to commit as they near 40.
     I know what Ms. Gottlieb meant when she says settle, she does not mean in it in the negative way that some may think, although that little innocious word settle does sound quite nasty doesn’t it.
      
     It means ok, he may not have the 6 pack and take vacations 2 times a  year, or be firmly entrenched at his career, but he is reliable,  loves you and seems to be a family man. I can imagine when im 40 it wont be any easier than it is now? why would it be.
      
     So don’t settle, but just be more realistic, maybe that sounds easier to swallow, no one person will embody all of the qualities we have dreamed about, but maybe they have other ones that are just as admirable, it doesn’t mean h e can go a week without calling you , or call you fat, or ignore you when youre angry. unacceptable!

     another thing, don’t approach love and dating as a chore, if you do it is exhausting, don’t screen every man as my potential husband/ or not.  go with the flow, enjoy yourself, yes keep track of the milestones and that time is indeed passing, ask yourself the big questions when the time is right, but please do not make it unbearable simply becuase you are past 30  35 or 40 and single
     but ladies, really.. time flies, and realistically, men will always have more choices than we do for mates, more quantity and quality.  I hope one day this one sided sexist paradigm will change where men might value a good woman and realize, yes time is ticking for him too.. but that ain’t happening soon. so in the meantime, love yourself, be happy, have fun and be realistic

     Evan, great post!

175. starthrower68 175

     Tia,

     I saw a very funny quote by a woman once that read, “I’d love to be in a relationship if it weren’t for dating”.

176. Karl R 176

     Tia said: (#174)
     “realistically, men will always have more choices than we do for mates, more quantity and quality.”
     
     quantity: Until you get about 55 years old, the difference in the ratio of men to women is rather even.
     http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p20-544.pdf
     Any man who chooses to date online is facing a far worse ratio than women do in the general population.

     quality: Do you have any support for your claim that women are higher quality than men? Are there specific traits that you are focusing on? All of my experience suggests that men and women are equal … as a general population. Specific individuals vary wildly from the median.

     Tia said: (#174)
     “I hope one day this one sided sexist paradigm will change where men might value a good woman and realize, yes time is ticking for him too.”

     How are you defining this “good woman” that men allegedly don’t want? To me, this sounds as unfounded as when some men claim that women don’t want “nice guys.”

     What is this one-sided, sexist paradigm that you’re referring to? That women go through menopause and men don’t? I could just as easily point out that women have a much easier time than men if they choose to become a single parent (like Lori Gottlieb). Women can go to a sperm bank and have their own child. If a man chooses to raise his own child as a single parent, he needs to find a surrogate mother.

     Time is ticking for men, even though they don’t have as hard of a deadline as women do. It’s true that a man can have kids when he’s in his 60s … but does he really want to be raising teenagers when he’s in his 80s?

177. sayanta 177

     Karl’s comment, #176-

     I think a lot of women put career and education into their ‘quality’ basket. I don’t have time to look this up now, but from what I’ve read in news mags, the ratio of women to men in college, grad school, legal and med professions seems to be about 60 to 40, or maybe even 70 to 30. Of course, this is just America.

     Men- as a whole- encompass half the world’s population. To get ‘quality,’ some women might have to look outside American nationality.

178. Elle 178

     I haven’t read all of the posts, but felt the need to backtrack to the “settling” debate. I was pretty horrified when I read Lori Gottlieb’s original article in the Atlantic and had no desire to read the book she then wrote. I eventually read the book and found it fascinating.
     I may be wrong, but I don’t think Lori has ever intended for anyone to marry someone they weren’t in love with. I think what people miss in her “argument” is this: instead of focusing on the “hot” men who aren’t suitable for long-term relationships, give some other men a chance, you may be surprised. I felt her original article did not explain this very well but the book does. She really isn’t advising anyone to marry someone for the sole reason of having children, she’s just saying “settle” meaning “look at the 6s and 7s instead of always looking at the 10s.”
     I will also add that her book made me really sad though. Sad for my own missed opportunities (I am now 56).

179. NotSureAboutThis 179

     Evan, I understand your logic in encouraging women to “settle” but we live in an era where many women can achieve as much as men. Many women are CEOs, self-made millionaires, doctors, physicists, entrepreneurs, and more. Older women as well as younger women who believe they can achieve great success in life also apply that belief to their personal lives. A 40 year-old man with a 6-figure salary and great family values may be looking for a woman 30 and under, but as more 20-something women climb the career ladder and start earning 6-figures a year they ask themselves “why do I want to date this older man? For his money? No, I make just as much money as he does. His money doesn’t impress me. Instead I want to date the 26 year-old coworker who is on his way to making 6-figures a year.” When women become high achievers and high earners the money and status that a man has starts to diminish in importance. Instead, a man’s looks and his youth become more valuable in the eyes of women.

     Men want youth and beauty but in a society where women are increasingly wealthy, powerful and influential, youth and beauty has become a commodity desired by both sexes. A new coworker recently joined our company. He is handsome, a soccer player, successful for his age, and just turned 30. The 20 – 40 year old women in the office are slavering over him, including me. Do we notice the 45-50 year old executives earning 6-figures? Not one bit.

     It’s time that society starts to recognize that those hard-headed, obnoxiously successful, overbearing women also like a bit of warmth, thoughtfulness and caring in a man, as well as a heavy dose of handsome.

180. Karl R 180

     NotSureAboutThis,
     You’re proving Evan’s point for him.

     NotSureAboutThis said: (#179)
     “A new coworker recently joined our company. He is handsome, a soccer player, successful for his age, and just turned 30. The 20 – 40 year old women in the office are slavering over him, including me.”

     Every woman who is 20-40 is chasing after this guy. How many of them will succeed? At most one.

     The women who are 35-40 have zero chance to marry him. (Maybe they can have a fling that’s just a temporary diversion for him, but nothing more.) He can get any 20-30 year old he wants. But these women are ignoring the available 40-50 year olds in order to pursue a fantasy.

     And if the 40-45 year old men want children of their own, they probably think the 40 year old women are “too old”. They’re holding out for the 35 year olds. If the women at 35 are holding out for the 30 year old hottie, they’ll lose their last chance at the 40-45 year olds.

     NotSureAboutThis said: (#179)
     “It’s time that society starts to recognize that those hard-headed, obnoxiously successful, overbearing women also like a bit of warmth, thoughtfulness and caring in a man, as well as a heavy dose of handsome.”

     I already recognize that they want all that. I just don’t care. If you’re hard-headed, obnoxious and overbearing, you just lost your chance with everyone but the desperate. I want kind and caring too, not hard-headed, obnoxious and overbearing … and I got I wanted without settling for someone like that.

     NotSureAboutThis said: (#179)
     “why do I want to date this older man? For his money? No, I make just as much money as he does. His money doesn’t impress me.”

     Except your idea of compromise is to pursue the upwardly-mobile 26 year old or ”successful for his age” 30 year old instead of the 6-figure 40-50 year old. Assuming the men in both categories are family-oriented and ambitious, none of them find you appealing.

     Think it through. If they marry you, they’ll have to cancel important business meetings to pick the kids up from daycare when you’re out of town on business. If they marry a part-time teacher at the local community college, this will never happen. They don’t need your money; they have enough of their own. You hinder their career goals. (So the 20-30 year old women in your office are wasting their time on their gorgeous coworker too.)

     You’d be better served to pursue a part-time teacher at the local community college. He can be at home keeping an eye on the kids while he grades papers … and you can be at the important business meeting.

     Re-read your post. You want the men who can have anyone they want. What do you have to offer them? Hard-headedness, obnoxiosness, and the ability to have your career goals interfere with theirs.

     What man would be won over by that sales pitch?

181. JerseyGirl 181

     “try asking women that are not as “sexy.” Good looking women always have boyfriends, some women have a waiting line of guys. Until you get good at meeting, then, go for what you want.”
     Yes. Please use the less attractive women to “play” with insincerely while you practice for the “hot” woman you think you deserve. Then hop on this blog and complain about how women like men with money. Because it’s okay for you to use women but it’s not okay for women to use you.

182. Gabriel 182

     And alot of women take out their “angst” on lesser attractive men as well.
     I find it disconcerting that many of you antagonize and subsequently dehumanize men when many of us are stuck in the same boat.
     I’ll give you a clue as to the central nucleus of your relationship problems:  It’s YOU.  Many of you (won’t mention any names) purposely maintain an unrealistic criteria in the arena of looks, status, etc. so you WON’T have to deal with members of the opposite sex.
     We call this a “defense mechanism.”  Boo, hoo, hoo.  Sympathy called; he just dived out the window.
     There ya go.  Secrets out.  You don’t have to pay me for my earth-shattering psychological theories; this one is on the house.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply