DISCOVER HOW SMART, STRONG & SUCCESSFUL WOMEN (THAT'S YOU!) CAN FINALLY Find Your Man
DISCOVER HOW
SMART WOMEN LIKE YOU CAN
FINALLY Find Your Man
Take this short quiz
to discover what you need to do now.
Take this short quiz now
Kate
Dear Kate,
You’ve got four different questions going on here.
There is “How do I know if it’s worth it to try a long distance relationship?”
There is “I don’t want to be the victim of a nice-player in a long distance relationship.”
There is “I’m falling for a guy that I’ve never met but have talked to on the phone for 6 weeks”.
Is there something wrong with a man in his 40’s that has never been married? My answer is predictable: Yes… and No.
If you read the above links, your dreams will be summarily dashed – not because he’s necessarily a player, but because the odds of ANY relationship working are slim, the odds of an ONLINE relationship working are slimmer, and the odds of a LONG-DISTANCE online relationship are the slimmest – especially when you haven’t even, um, y’know, MET yet.
That said, the part of your question which really intrigues me is the “red flag” question:
Is there something wrong with a man in his 40’s that has never been married?
My answer is predictable: Yes… and No.
This is where I would make an argument that stereotypes exist for a reason. The unhealthy part of stereotyping is not necessarily the stereotype itself, but the assumption that ALL people in the category fit the stereotype.
Thus, if you have preconceived notions about gorgeous people, rich people, short people, gay people, Irish people, etc – those notions probably came from SOMEWHERE. They’re not pure fabrications.
Jewish people like playing Twister on the lawn is a fabrication.
Jewish people are often highly educated and highly neurotic is not.
Are we together on this one? Good.
So there’s the stereotype of the forty-something bachelor – and it’s a valid one. He’s a player. He’s a Peter Pan. He’s a commitmentphobe. He’s too picky. He’s emotionally unavailable. He’s a heartbreaker. He’s unrealistic.
All of those things are likely contributing factors as to why a man might be 42 and never married.
So now you’re faced with this very real dilemma – is this man a victim of circumstance, or is he the common denominator in all of his relationship failures?
But what if he was living with a woman for seven years who didn’t believe in traditional marriage? What if he was in a three-year relationship with a woman who cheated on him? What if he was once ready to propose and she ended up breaking his heart? What if he spent five years in a dead-end relationship and has had difficulty getting back out there? What if – god forbid – he made a bunch of bad dating decisions and just hasn’t met “the one”? (Hey, all of us want to think that about ourselves – let’s just say for argument’s sake that it’s true!)
So now you’re faced with this very real dilemma – is this man a victim of circumstance, or is he the common denominator in all of his relationship failures?
And I think it would be very easy, and coldly logical, to say BOTH.
This doesn’t mean you should enter into a relationship with a forty-something bachelor with the expectation of failure.
It does, however, mean that he didn’t become a forty-something bachelor by making great decisions in love.
Comments