Sperm Wail
I'm 26, and I've been looking at my stepsister's dating life with a measure of worry. She's 36, and wants children, but still hasn't found "the one." She's gone from being ultra-picky to swearing she'll just marry the next guy who doesn't pick his nose at the dinner table. Wow. Is that what it comes down to for women -- eventually having to give up and settle for a guy you're less than on fire for? It horrifies me to think of being her at some point.
--A Decade To Go
Women in their 20s are quick to rule a man out for deep character flaws like wearing Dockers, not knowing that you're supposed to hate Nickelback, and buying vegetables grown by multinational conglomerates instead of two aging hippies. Some women in their 30s, especially those who wake up with baby rabies at 35, continue to maintain high standards: demanding that a man be straight, single, and paroled. Ideally, that is. At 39, they'll pretty much consider anything with a paycheck and human sperm.
The need to scale back from Prince Charming to Prince No Recent Felony Convictions starts with The List -- the long list of demands no mortal man could ever meet. But, the problem isn't being uber-picky, but remaining uber-picky. Many women in their early-to-mid 20s only think they're ready for a relationship, so they sabotage every potential one that comes their way. Eventually, they get ready, and then ditch those tiny calipers they've been using to determine whether a guy's nostrils flare at the proper angle. Other women need some hard lessons in what to be picky about. Sometimes, it takes a stint with Paul The Pot Cloud or the cruel Adonis to appreciate the nice guy who calls when he says he will and loves to surprise you, and not by letting you catch him in bed with your two best girlfriends.
Most women seem to get their priorities in order well before they come up against the "enjoy by" date on their eggs. But, as Jessica Grose quipped on Slate, "...Nobody ever went broke (overestimating) the anxiety women feel about getting married." Grose is referring to the bestselling Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough, by Lori Gottlieb. Gottlieb, most charmingly, finds being single at 40 akin to being in a drunk-driving accident and left comatose and brain-dead. Personally, I find there's nothing lonelier than feeling completely alone while in a relationship with somebody else.
Of course, that's easier to say if you don't want kids. Gottlieb's advice to women who do? "Settle!" Forget looking for love, passion, or intense connection (aka "zing"); look to set up "infrastructure" for a family, and quick-quick, find a dependable guy with a nice fat salary to be your tool. (Oh, the paycheckstasy!)
Obviously, a 30-year-old woman who wants to have children before her ovaries start laughing at her can't be as picky as she was at 22, and Gottlieb wisely notes that the search for a husband should be "about finding someone who is enough, as opposed to someone who is everything." But, both her book and her 2008 valentine to "settling" in The Atlantic are filled with advice like "Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics." Okay, you can be the one who decorates, but how do you spend your life with a guy when kissing him reminds you of licking a dumpster? (Hmmm, maybe Gottlieb is counting on how marriage is often a cure for sex.)
"Zing" isn't everything, but you'll probably have a pretty grim time staying married without it (especially if you have to stick it out for all those years from delivery room to dorm room). Sure, zing fades -- you're probably not going to light up like you did on the first date the 30,000th time he walks into the living room -- but having a base of love, attraction, affection and connection is what helps you not hate him when he's being so annoying it makes your fillings hurt. (Unfortunately, you can't just look deep into his retirement account and appreciate how obedient he is at household tasks.)
Beyond all the love stuff, you shouldn't get together with any man you don't respect and admire; meaning you need to have the hots for a man not just physically but as a human being. If you want kids, do your best to make that happen, but accept that it might not, and develop yourself, your friendships and your life. If you feel complete without a man, men are more likely to feel incomplete without you. You, in turn, might not have to force yourself into that Gottlieb-style bliss of going from demanding that a guy have hair to demanding that a guy have a head.
"there's nothing lonelier than feeling completely alone while in a relationship with somebody else."
Brilliant and very true.
jonQPublic at June 29, 2010 5:42 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/06/sperm-wail.html#comment-1728065">comment from jonQPublicThank you so much.
Amy Alkon at June 29, 2010 5:44 PM
There's a line in the Ben Folds song, "Brick", that goes:
-Now that I have found someone
I'm feeling more alone
Than I ever have before-
The first time I heard those words, I immediately understood that my sadness about the dead-end relationship I was in at the time was a warning sign telling me to get out. Sometimes what you need is for someone to say that which you haven't been able to say to yourself.
Marina at June 29, 2010 6:17 PM
I think that's very sad. I'm going to be 37 Monday and there is no way I would ever settle. I've never been married, no kids, although both are something I want, but I won't have kids without first getting married and won't get married just to be married. I can understand feeling like your biological clock is ticking, but I'd rather mine run out then settle for a life I wouldn't be happy in.
Nina at June 29, 2010 6:19 PM
The whole approach of choosing a mate by making a long list of checklist items has serious drawbacks...as does the use of the same approach for hiring employees. See my post the five-pound butterfly revisited.
david foster at June 29, 2010 6:58 PM
Brilliant answer, Amy. The only thing I'd add is that "bad" relationships can, over time, teach you about what you'd like out of a good relationship, and thus help you along with the process of transforming The List into something workable and helpful. I didn't meet the guy I would marry until my mid-30s (despite never having a List per se), so I had no choice but to develop myself as an independent person. I did consider the possibility that I'd wind up everyone's friend and no one's One, but preferred that to an unhappy relationship.
Now that I am married, Gottlieb's take on marriage strikes me as missing the point in a fundamental way. Marriage can be wonderful, but living with someone day in and day out in an emotionally intimate relationship is going to be very, very hard unless you love each other and have a certain level of compatibility to begin with. No, love isn't typically as it's portrayed in the movies or in romance novels, but it's real. I'm married to someone with whom I fit extremely well...and we still miscommunicate and have to adjust to one another at times. I can't imagine being married to someone who I just thought was "okay."
It's really easy for small issues and disagreements to balloon into large ones in an emotionally intimate relationship -- if you don't have a foundation of belief that the person you're with isn't interchangeable with other similar members of the opposite sex, you're going to have a hard time, methinks. (And as for Gottlieb's advice to settle so that you can have bio-kids -- what happens if you settle and then find out that your husband has a super-low sperm count? Infertility is tough enough when you're in a happy marriage, but in a so-so marriage...)
Anyway, I'm betting that the stepsister isn't really ready to marry an ex-con with halitosis. Sometimes you have to break yourself out of a non-productive mindset. I will say, though, that a 26-year-old's definition of "being on fire" for someone may differ from a 36-year-old's.
marion at June 29, 2010 7:19 PM
"there's nothing lonelier than feeling completely alone while in a relationship with somebody else."
Been there, done that. Couldn't agree more.
William (wbhicks@hotmail.com) at June 29, 2010 7:26 PM
Sure, zing fades -- you're probably not going to light up like you did on the first date the 30,000th time he walks into the living room -- but having a base of love, attraction, affection and connection is what helps you not hate him when he's being so annoying it makes your fillings hurt.
Amy, I think this column is one of the more thoughtful and incisive answers you've ever written. Yes, there are degrees of feeling, not everyone has a relationship where you want to rip their clothes off every time you see them for the next twenty years, or share every thought with, or spend all your time with - but if you're all "take them or leave them, but he's good enough" at the start, how will you ever cope with seeing them day in day out? I have friends who get into these sorts of relationships then wonder why they break up in a few months. When I ask if they were really into him I get "oh, he was nice, sex wasn't too bad, he was considerate...but...just didn't do much for me". And mostly I hear that the guy broke it off, my guess being because he could tell she wasn't all that interested and it turned him off.
The time pressure on women who want kids is a real problem - but I don't think settling for someone with a pulse and a job is the answer. Cutting down the unrealistic expectations list is sensible, but if that still isn't getting you anywhere by mid-30s maybe it's time to start planning a life without everything you wanted just in case. I've given up a few dreams too, if some women never meet someone they could actually raise a child with in a happy relationship it's not the end of the world.
Ltw at June 29, 2010 9:43 PM
Yeah, it stinks for the guy in these situations as well... if he's deluded himself into thinking that this woman is the love of his life.
Eventually, he wakes up to the fact that she's "learned" to love him. And to "appreciate" him. And all his "good qualities." But ah, the downer is that they still have to "work every day" on their relationship (such as it is.)
If two people are truly in love, marriage is the best thing in the world. If not, you're roomies for life... or until the divorce papers are filed.
kevin_m at June 29, 2010 10:11 PM
I suspect the 'long lists' are sometimes in themselves symptoms of something else, e.g. low self-esteem - by manufacturing a worldview in which no man meets your exacting standards, you in effect posit yourself as being of a higher *status* than, basically, men in general. (Women are generally attracted to high-status men because they desire status and historically try to attain 'status by proxy' through mate choice; however, simply viewing men as beneath you is another way of tricking your ego into thinking it has attained that status already - if you're 'above' men instead of attaining status 'through' a man, then it must mean your position in the status hierarchy is apparently even higher.)
"But ah, the downer is that they still have to "work every day" on their relationship ... If two people are truly in love, marriage is the best thing in the world"
*Everyone* has to "work every day" on their relationship in the long term; this belief that if you just find 'true love' then everything will automatically click and be smiles and puppies all the way is what leads to high divorce rates. I've seen it happen several times to friends who were over the moon in love, within a year or two the spark has worn off and they go through some or other tough times, and the relationship is *truly* tested for the first time.
Lobster at June 29, 2010 10:48 PM
The LW's sister has been fertile for twenty years, but never met a man who would make a good husband and father? Ha! I doubt it. She's wasted her fertile years and it's no one's fault but hers.
It's no wonder that the LW is horrified at seeing her own future. She's already at the end of her peak fertility. Female fertility begins to decline at 27 and falls off a cliff at 35. After that, she'd be lucky to conceive a normal child through natural means.
I wonder if the LW thinks she's made the best use of the most fertile (and most attractive) years of her life?
Tyler at June 29, 2010 11:37 PM
"It horrifies me to think of being her at some point. "
LW, your sister has jumped from one extreme to the other out of sudden realisation and desperation. You don't have to 'become her at some point', provided you actually learn something from her mistakes, because there exists a middle ground between the two extremes, where the practical real world exists - you can still make a good choice, it's not one extreme or the other nor is it an eventual inevitable running into the other extreme.
Lobster at June 29, 2010 11:50 PM
That's a bit harsh Tyler. This is an ongoing problem with an increasingly technological society. Once upon a time, leaving school at 15 and getting a decent job was an option - whether you were male or female. And people grew up faster as a result of taking on that responsibility. Now that adolescence is effectively extended to mid-20s by the need for more education and the consequent lack of exposure to real life, women are hitting a crunch where a) they are not ready for marriage/kids until late 20s at the earliest, and b) prospective partners aren't either until even later. But biology doesn't keep up with these sorts of changes. I said above it's a problem - but I don't think anyone has a good solution for it yet, other than assistance for older women to conceive.
I wonder if the LW thinks she's made the best use of the most fertile (and most attractive) years of her life?
Nice. It's all her fault. Of course, if she married the first guy that came along, had a few kids then divorced I doubt you would be happy about that either. Deal with reality the way it is or shut up.
LtW at June 30, 2010 12:00 AM
LtW
Are you telling me to "Deal with reality the way it is or shut up"? Because I think you've got that backwards. I'm taking a steely-eyed look at the biological reality. It's the LW and her step-sister who have failed to deal with reality and are now confronting it. Maybe the letter writer should be the one to shut up?
How can you possibly say that it's "an ongoing problem with an increasingly technological society"? What nonsense. That statement is premised on teaching women to be office drones first and mothers second. And isn't "assistance for older women to conceive" just more technology? And didn't you just write that technology was the problem? Wouldn't less technology be the solution?
Tyler at June 30, 2010 1:00 AM
I think Kevin touched on a point that is so often overlooked in the whole "settle" discussion.
When someone makes a decision to join his/her life with someone, that someone should be able to trust it's because they are "the one" vs. "the one that's around when I decide." The second scenario is more than a little deceptive.
Tasha at June 30, 2010 3:40 AM
@Lobster: "I suspect the 'long lists' are sometimes in themselves symptoms of something else, e.g. low self-esteem..."
You know, Lobster, I think you've hit upon something important, and it connects up nicely with the last paragraph of what Miss Alkon wrote. Do confident women (or men, for that matter), comfortable with themselves and their lives, need to keep a list like that, written down or not? Would they be more likely to find higher-quality potential mates than the list keepers?
old rpm daddy at June 30, 2010 3:55 AM
The time pressure on women who want kids is a real problem
It is? Why???
Look around at when women naturally find a guy and start making a family. Check your history. It's at 16.
So, normally by 15, teenage girls manage to sort through teenage guys and find one to pair up for life.
Nina, at 37, at any other point in history, you'd be a Grandma.
My take on all this? A lack of a caste system, (or a system like it) encourages women to hold out for the best they can think of. Which is impossible to tell. If they decide to go with Roy, that means they'll never get a chance to marry that lottery winner, or that Senator.
So sure, they meet some guy, but is he amazing? No? Hold out! You might get the amazing guy next! Repeat till dead.
ErikZ at June 30, 2010 6:31 AM
Lobster says: "*Everyone* has to "work every day" on their relationship in the long term; this belief that if you just find 'true love' then everything will automatically click and be smiles and puppies all the way is what leads to high divorce rates."
I agree 100%. I've seen it too. People who are married and divorced by 25-28 yrs old and it's annoying!
CC at June 30, 2010 6:35 AM
Folks, if, after reaching puberty and subsequently meeting a few thousand members of the opposite sex about your age range, you then still claim that you never found "the One", the issue is you, not the quality of the potential mates you encountered.
Spartee at June 30, 2010 6:36 AM
"I wonder if the LW thinks she's made the best use of the most fertile (and most attractive) years of her life?"
I take issue with the "most attractive" part. For most of my 20s, I was all bones and zits...and wore spandex way too often. It wasn't until my 30s that I finally developed a sense of style and seemed to blossom into the elegant beauty I've become.
Yes, it's good I had kids before the expiration date, but I think I'm more attractive now. A lot of us 40-somethings are. Have you SEEN the recent photo of Amy? Hard to imagine she would've been any hotter in her 20s.
I feel like I've almost lived this issue backwards. I "settled" early for the guy with the paycheck and family-making structure in place, and I was largely miserable.
Now, I wake up next to a guy who's so sexy I can't believe I'm next to him, and after we have sex, I want to have it again. That should've happened before, not now, but I'm enjoying it.
You've got to have a physical spark. Not that it's everything - qualities such as good character and an even temperament are very important too - but anybody that marries without being physically attracted to the other person is going to serve a very long sentence, which isn't fair to themselves or their partner.
lovelysoul at June 30, 2010 6:37 AM
Is that what it comes down to for women -- eventually having to give up and settle for a guy you're less than on fire for?
--------------------------
Beyond all the love stuff, you shouldn't get together with any man you don't respect and admire; meaning you need to have the hots for a man not just physically but as a human being. If you want kids, do your best to make that happen, but accept that it might not, and develop yourself, your friendships and your life. If you feel complete without a man, men are more likely to feel incomplete without you. You, in turn, might not have to force yourself into that Gottlieb-style bliss of going from demanding that a guy have hair to demanding that a guy have a head.
-----------------------------------
"Is that what it comes down to for women?"
Amy touches on it but women live in what some have termed a gynocentric society that they think nothing of marrying a guy they are not in love with having kids with and then devastating his life by divorcing him, financially devastating him and taking his kids. That is the little consideration men get in our society today.
David M. at June 30, 2010 7:06 AM
But ah, the downer is that they still have to "work every day" on their relationship (such as it is.)
Relationships take work, but it's the difference between picking cotton and composing a wonderful song. Relationships shouldn't feel like picking cotton.
When someone makes a decision to join his/her life with someone, that someone should be able to trust it's because they are "the one" vs. "the one that's around when I decide."
And yet, that's how it is for most people. There are probably a number of people in the world I'd be equally compatible with, but my husband was the one who was there when I was ready to marry, and I was the one there when he was ready to marry. We love each other very much, but it's silly to think there was only one person in the world I could have married.
MonicaP at June 30, 2010 7:08 AM
Wow Tyler, you sound like you got dumped recently and are all too pleased to see women being 'punished' for being too picky.
Anne de Vries at June 30, 2010 7:20 AM
There may be studies on this that Amy probably knows of, but body chemistry plays a subconscious role too. I suspect we derive a lot of information from tactile and sensory responses that we too often ignore. Gottleib's advice to just ignore halitosis is wrong.
It may sound bizarre, but I've noticed my guy doesn't smell bad to me. Sure, he sweats and I've been around him when he's dirty, working in the yard, etc, but it's never really unpleasant. His breath, too, is rarely bad, whereas my ex often seemed to have bad breath, at least to me.
It's tempting to overlook these things, but maybe these odors are telling us something. Perhaps it stems from tribal days, when our senses were keener. But if you find yourself frequently repulsed by your partner's smell or taste (assuming they have generally good hygiene), then they're probably not "the one."
Besides, why do that to yourself?
lovelysoul at June 30, 2010 7:28 AM
I read somewhere, recently, that if someone smells good to you, that is an indicator of genetic compatibility. It's not bizarre at all.
This entire settling business leaves me cold. Yesterday, I was Mr NotGoodEnough, and today I'm Mr WillDo? I have other plans, sorry.
I don't remember the band, or the song, but I hear it at the gym. "She likes me for me." I like her for her, too. There is always the possibility that there is someone better out there, if not among the 3 billion women on this planet, but in the entire universe. Then again, probably not.
You've got to want what you've got.
MarkD at June 30, 2010 8:01 AM
"Now, I wake up next to a guy who's so sexy I can't believe I'm next to him, and after we have sex, I want to have it again. That should've happened before, not now, but I'm enjoying it."
But, would he have been the person to have kids with? No one person can be everything-a constant sex turn-on, help around the house, great conversation, good coparent. Impossible. You have to prioritize which is most important to you-and if it's having kids, then being a good parent needs to be right up at the top of your list. Which is not to say you should marry someone who repulses you. It just doens't have to be the hottest man you've ever met. I too could have married and been happy with any number of people, when I was ready I met DH and he was ready. Doesn't mean we aren't in love, we are, but we were also ready for this stage in life.
've read studies about our sense of smell playing a really, really big role in our attraction at the subconcious level. I think it theorized that we are subconciously attracted to people who "smell" like us (have similar genetics) which goes back to the tribe thing of long ago.
momof4 at June 30, 2010 8:05 AM
I just wrote a whole book on here as a comment, then realized that what I really needed to do was ask Amy in a letter.
So all I'm going to say is that I agree 100% with MonicaP. The idea of 'The One' is pretty darn fairytale. But I LOVE my fiance and we are wonderfully compatible. Because it just so happened that when I was ready to stop messing around with bozos and grow some standards (just like Amy said - I was the girl who needed those hard lessons in what to be picky about), he was ready to stop sleeping with half the bar floozys in Brooklyn. Love is born!
I don't know if it's biology of evolution or what, but I also believe that there are many compatible pairings for every person on this earth. I have even met men since dating my now-fiance whom I felt that kind of compatibility with. The difference is, I no longer mistake that for 'fate' or some other kind of dramatic crap. And I make an effort to know myself at all times. I think these are the things that keep people out of meaningful relationships and into hot water.
lorim at June 30, 2010 8:22 AM
The genetic compatibility makes sense. He would've made a great dad, but he never wanted kids, so had we met when I was younger and ready to have children, it simply wouldn't have worked.
Now, I'm quite grateful that he doesn't have kids, as it would add a lot more complexity to our lives. Not that I ever ruled out men with kids - I dated many - but blending families is more of a challenge. It's nice that I don't have to deal with resentful kids or an ex. Luckily, he's been very accepting of mine.
But we do have similar genetic backgrounds and perhaps that's why he smells so good. If I had known about this when I was younger, I would've paid more attention to the sensory input, which is obviously there for a reason.
lovelysoul at June 30, 2010 8:25 AM
What nonsense. That statement is premised on teaching women to be office drones first and mothers second.
Tyler, you're an idiot. I said that adolescence has been extended for everyone because it takes longer than it did before to learn useful skills, but that this is more of a problem for women than men when it comes to raising a family. If your answer is to teach women to be mothers first, well, the time-travelling Delorean is parked outside for you. I'm more interested in how the conflict between career and fertility will work itself out. I did say I didn't know the answer.
So, normally by 15, teenage girls manage to sort through teenage guys and find one to pair up for life.
Nina, at 37, at any other point in history, you'd be a Grandma.
ErikZ, you were quoting me, so leave Nina alone. At other points in history, teenage girls got handed over to older men by their fathers too - that doesn't say "sorted through teenage guys to me". And at a lot of those times, at 37 Nina wouldn't be a grandmother, she'd be what we call dead. Let's go back to that shall we? Or maybe we could recognise that life has changed from the Middle Ages and try to work out how to deal with it.
Ltw at June 30, 2010 9:01 AM
What is up with everybody thinking they should have children in the first place. What makes the LW and all you other 20-somethings think you'll be decent mothers? And what ever happened to Zero Population Growth? Please first examine *why* you want children as that seems the driving force in your decision-making about your whole life.
It's one thing marrying someone you love or don't love. But when you bring children into the a love-lacking marriage on purpose, you're forcing new lives into a sad, messed up environment and if you're willing to do that, you need to question your ability to be a good mother, IMHO.
Linda O. at June 30, 2010 9:15 AM
"Of course, if she married the first guy that came along, had a few kids then divorced"
That's a bit of a strawman. It's not like there are only two extremes that exist. That's part of the very problem we're discussing, people thinking there are only two extremes - "wait for Mr Perfect" or "grab the first guy that comes along", and using either as a rationalisation for stupid behaviour.
"A lack of a caste system, (or a system like it) encourages women to hold out for the best they can think of. Which is impossible to tell. If they decide to go with Roy, that means they'll never get a chance to marry that lottery winner, or that Senator.
So sure, they meet some guy, but is he amazing? No? Hold out! You might get the amazing guy next!"
I think it's also the shift in culture away from personal responsibility. In the old days, people understood that a relationship was something you *built*, and worked on, and that you're an active part in that (working together with your partner towards common cause, and simply thinking about the other person and not being selfish) --- as Amy (I think it was) said the other day, 'you get the relationship you create'. Nowadays, people think of a relationship more as something that 'happens to them', passively. Like, you're just walking along, and suddenly Mr (or Ms) Perfect comes along, and 'makes you happy' --- no work required, only 'true love' .. you just sit there, with an 'its all about me' attitude, and the burden of responsibility is effectively heaped all on the 'other person' to make it work. If only you find that one perfect person you're "compatible" with, you can just sit there and relationship magic will happen to you ... right. And then find anything you don't like? Must be a sign of "incompatibility". Just the way the universe is, shrug ... true compatibility 'happens to you' by accident or doesn't, in this worldview, you're not an active agent and there is no causative connection between your actions and the outcomes. I even had a girlfriend who used to literally often say to me "oh, it means we're not compatible" when there were things we didn't agree on, even minor things like taste or restaurant preference ... needless to say it didn't end well, because it's a self-fulfilling prophecy when you think like that.
Lobster at June 30, 2010 9:22 AM
Lovelysoul, it sounds like you've got it all worked out - needs vary with time and place, and what works for you now might not have been what you imagined when you were 15. Good luck I hope it stays good...
Ltw at June 30, 2010 9:26 AM
"Of course, if she married the first guy that came along, had a few kids then divorced"
The fact is, most women have around 15 to 20 years to find a reasonably decent man before their biological clock starts to wind down. And frankly, that is a loooooooooooong time ... if you really wanted to start a family, and you were unable to find a man who was 'good enough' in that lengthy timeframe, then it's almost certain that YOU were in some way the author of that sad situation, and not just that every single man of the thousands you ever met just happened to be too mediocre.
Lobster at June 30, 2010 9:31 AM
(Hmm, I see Spartee already said pretty much what I just did, only better.)
Lobster at June 30, 2010 9:34 AM
"... I think I'm more attractive now. A lot of us 40-somethings are. Have you SEEN the recent photo of Amy? Hard to imagine she would've been any hotter in her 20s. "
Sorry, , but for every woman who manages to look better when older, there are roughly a bazillion that looked hottest at 19 and went downhill from there. And of the few exceptional cases, many are because the women just didn't try as hard when they were younger, probably because they didn't have to.
Lobster at June 30, 2010 9:38 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/06/sperm-wail.html#comment-1728224">comment from LobsterThanks, Lobster. I was cute in my 20s, by virtue of being young, but I look like me now (and don't let myself go). It's like I got carved out physically along with my thoughts.
Amy Alkon at June 30, 2010 9:51 AM
I was cute in my 20s, by virtue of being young, but I look like me now (and don't let myself go). It's like I got carved out physically along with my thoughts.
That's an interesting way of putting it. I was looking at my recent wedding pics and the ones taken when I got married at 23, and I'm so much happier with how I look now. I look like an adult now, while before I looked like a little girl playing dress up.
MonicaP at June 30, 2010 9:55 AM
"Wow Tyler, you sound like you got dumped recently and are all too pleased to see women being 'punished' for being too picky."
Anne, thank you for your cliched response. I knew that I could count on someone to accuse me of being an angry loser who can't get laid. That must be it. Why else would I be critical of the LW and her step-sister?
The way that you re-framed the whole question is ridiculous. No one is punishing them for their poor choices. As with most things in life, they're doing it to themselves. But on one point, you're right, I do take a perverse joy in watching people fuck up their own lives and then act like victims. It amuses me.
Tyler at June 30, 2010 10:14 AM
It's been my experience that women tend to become even pickier and more demanding as they get older. The 20 somethings may have some silly criteria, but they still have a romantic idea of relationships. Women who are single in their 30's are often too 'pragmatic', to the point that they're simply not enjoyable to date.
There's also the fact that 20 something women can get away with things that 30+ women can't, but many 30 somethings don't recognize this fact. They try to play men like they had when they were younger, but their mojo is gone, and the men are more mature, and it backfires.
So I'm not sure that for a woman who's single in her mid 30's that it's solely a matter of her rejecting too many men. They may be more likely to be rejected by men, or to find themselves in relationships of convenience.
matt at June 30, 2010 10:30 AM
"Tyler, you're an idiot."
Going right for the ad hominem attack in your rebuttal: Classy.
LtW, you're premise of extended adolescence is irrelevant in regards to men and still nonsensical when applied to women. It has nothing to do with being old-fashioned.
Men are not going to be mothers. Few men are going to be kept men and househusbands. We're still required to take care of ourselves. And, like our caveman ancestors, we're still required to take care of our women when they're pregnant and nursing. Even if she's on mat leave, I'll still be going to work. it doesn't really matter if I'm 25 or 55 when this happens.
She, on the other hand is going to be pregnant, nursing, and doing the bulk of the child care because she's the mom. If, as so many say, motherhood is the most important job there is, why do we treat it as an afterthought? Shouldn't we teach girls to be mothers?
Women have their whole lives to learn job skills, but they have a small part of their lives in which to bear children without medical intervention. Why are we acting like it's okay for women to waste their fertile years and then pay for hormones and IVF just to have a miscarriage at 45?
I'm not going to pretend that it is.
Tyler at June 30, 2010 10:35 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/06/sperm-wail.html#comment-1728240">comment from mattAs I dated a few "mistake boyfriends," I realized I had to have somebody ethical. Now, it isn't that I had been looking for somebody unethical, but I made it top priority, so I'd vet anybody along ethical lines and toss them if they showed themselves not to be. I was alone for eight years in my 30s, for the most part, but I now have a boyfriend who's truly the best person I know, and who I know will always do the right thing, the kind thing, the gentlemanly thing in any situation.
Amy Alkon at June 30, 2010 10:45 AM
>i>Women have their whole lives to learn job skills, but they have a small part of their lives in which to bear children without medical intervention.
The problem with this is that while women have their whole lives to learn job skills, they don't have their whole lives to build careers. Starting a new career with people 20-30 years younger than you is not a good time. And a woman who becomes a mom before developing the means of taking care of herself financially puts herself at the mercy of whatever man happens to be supporting her -- and puts men in the position of possibly having to support these women for life, whether they stay married or not.
It's not a bad thing to want a career first then children, or children first then a career, or both at the same time. But something has to give. Very few women are equally successful at career, family and love. Maybe at different points of their lives, but not all at the same time. If you're going to wait until 35 to get married and have children, you may have a wonderful career, but you're going to face different challenges in creating a family.
MonicaP at June 30, 2010 11:07 AM
"Sorry, , but for every woman who manages to look better when older, there are roughly a bazillion that looked hottest at 19 and went downhill from there."
Sadly, that's true. It's not always true, but I agree that many women my age, and younger, just accept looking badly. They don't really *have* to, but they get lazy.
And that's partly what this is about. Some of the women who embrace this "settling" philosophy are the same ones who let themselves go out of laziness. Then, when they find their selection is limited, rather than improve their appeareance, they extol the virtues of settling...as if they have a choice.
It's all well and good if you're on the same page, but how does the guy feel? Does he want to be settled for? My guess is no.
It's simply not fair to marry someone that you're not attracted to. For most red-blooded men, sexual fulfillment is a major component to the contentment they feel in a relationship, so these women may think that they're providing a stable structure in which to build a family, but, in reality, they're not. They're on very shaky ground.
A wife may be able to put her husband off during the childbearing/early childhood years, pleading exhaustion, but eventually, he'll catch on and be resentful of the fact that he's with a woman who doesn't desire him.
These are the marriages that crumble, usually before the children are out of high school. Yet, it's like the women don't think or plan beyond the preschool years (I was probably just as guilty of this, so I know).
You have to realize that, in the end, it's just going to be the two of you, so he better be someone you like and admire...and don't find physically repulsive. Passion ebbs and flows, but it's got to be an ingredient in the first place.
lovelysoul at June 30, 2010 11:07 AM
That's it Amy, as you grow up, your relationsips -family, friendships and romantic - help teach you about what's important. It also helps teach you about yourself: your triggers, what sends you down into a knee-jerk reaction.
I've never felt so lonely as I did with my ex-fiance. We're not bad people just turns out supremely bad at the day-to-day together.
I used the time after that relationship imploded navel gazing and was in the wilderness for a couple of years figuring out some really important stuff about myself.
It seems no co-incidence that my boyfriend of a year and I have just moved in together and it's the best, most tension-free relationship I've ever had. Believe me, there's no cotton-picking.
I think that timing is everything - I had to be ready for this relationship. I truly believe that 'when the student is ready, the teacher will appear'.
AntoniaB at June 30, 2010 11:25 AM
That's it Antonia, how many people really do the tough introspective work to really know thyself? Not many I suspect.
Richard Cook at June 30, 2010 11:43 AM
Lovelysoul makes some good points. In my experience, women who've kept themselves together ,and aren't bonkers, don't need to worry about settling. But they're a minority among single women in the US who are past 30 or so; most of whom just aren't physically attractive. This is the 900lb gorilla in the discussion of relationships, and settling, among this age group. The whole thing is skewed by the refusal to acknowledge that most of these women are choosing from a very limited group of less desirable men.
Greg at June 30, 2010 12:37 PM
Thiis is slighty of topic, but I dont really think it takes longer to teach skill to people, its just we insist on teaching at a pace "everybody" can keep up with.
I taught my little brother basic alegbra when he was 8, I was held back in math class because the next class level was full of kids a yr older than me and there wanst room, the fact that half that class barely managed to pass with D's was little comfort. I had to take 4 yrs of english in high school I cant for the life of me figure out why given every single year the same rules for writting were taught - and not that it does me any good. When ever writting anything offical I have to print it out and have a friend proof read it because my brain just wont see the problems.
Most parents are unfortunatly too busy to really push their childrens education. As a result gifted people are stuck learning at the speed of the idiots and troublemakers and with the institutional setting most schiools foster they are not encouraged to read ahead or to try and excell.
Is it really anywonder then after 13-20 something years of slogging thru such a remaedial syatem that these newly minted "adults" are completely clueless when it comes to just about everything?
lujlp at June 30, 2010 1:25 PM
Ltw posed some interesting thoughts about adolescence up there. We talk a lot about "extended adolescence" and people not really growing up until their mid-to-late twenties. But adolescence itself is a mostly invented phenomenon. Like Ltw said above, you finished puberty, got a job, and/or got married and had kids. All by, in today's standards, a very young age. But in the early twentieth century, we wanted to keep children out of the factories in our newly-industrialized society. So we extended basic education for the poor, thereby eventually creating teenagers who were now not seen as grown enough to be working for a living. But, cognitively speaking, we do most of our psychological growing up during our adolescence. I wonder how much of that is culturally related and how much is actual brain chemistry.
Anyway, to hop back on the topic train, I think that a lot of these love issues are a result of the relative newness of adolescence. And, like Ltw said, it just keeps getting longer (partly due to more people opting for more education), especially considering we're entering puberty earlier now. On the one hand, I think it's great that we don't have to make such life-changing decisions at such young ages. We can date for fun for a good long while, even if we eventually do want to get married and have kids. But since we can date for a good long while, it must sneak up on some women that "eventually" will eventuall come and they're running out of time if they want to have children biologically, therefore inciting the "baby rabies." I'm not excusing any crazy behavior here (see comments on a column and subsequent blog item a little while back), but I do think it's interesting. I mean, it's not like we women don't know that our eggs don't have the shelf life of Twinkies. But it seems to take so many by surprise.
Is it really any wonder that after 13-20 something years of slogging thru such a remedial system that these newly minted "adults" are completely clueless when it comes to just about everything?
I think this is directly related, luj. "Adults" is right. I certainly wasn't an adult when I graduated high school, no matter what the law says. Psychologically, I was still an adolescent, as were all of my peers. Maybe we need to push a little harder against the "You're the best no matter what" thinking to actually prepare these kids a bit more for the world.
NumberSix at June 30, 2010 2:14 PM
It may sound bizarre, but I've noticed my guy doesn't smell bad to me. Sure, he sweats and I've been around him when he's dirty, working in the yard, etc, but it's never really unpleasant.
The smell thing is actually that we are attracted to genetically dissimilar people as that is better for stronger offspring. The pill can interfere with that, causing women to be attracted to more feminine men as well as men who are more genetically similar, for example, which also happens during pregnancy, when a woman needs more security.
And that doesn't sound bizarre at all. My current bf finds the way I smell totally intoxicating (even when I think I'm starting to stink) and I don't think he smells at all - I think he might be an android, because even after walking for hours on a hot day, dressed in layers of black clothes (don't ask, he's weird), with no deodorant, he doesn't smell! How does he do that?! If you don't like someone's smell, the relationship is doomed, IMO. You cannot live with someone for long who repulses you in some sensory way like that.
As a side note, it's funny that we spend so much money on scented products that disguise our natural scent. Seems counterproductive, although apparently women are less fooled by it than men. Go figure.
Thag Jones at June 30, 2010 3:01 PM
"I mean, it's not like we women don't know that our eggs don't have the shelf life of Twinkies. But it seems to take so many by surprise."
It's called "thinking".
"I certainly wasn't an adult when I graduated high school, no matter what the law says. Psychologically, I was still an adolescent, as were all of my peers."
No offence, but please, speak for yourself on such matters; I was raised to think maturely, seriously and clearly, to be independent, and with grown-up values and a mature outlook on life, and when I left high school I was far and away already a capable, thinking, responsible adult. Now in my 30's I'm a bit more experienced, I'd say, but not much more 'adult' than I was already at 18. I don't mind that some people only grow up much later, but I do mind that some of them justify their behaviour and shirk responsibility for their actions in adulthood by claiming that "everyone" at that age is still immature/young/stupid etc. Certainly, I've always been one of the few exceptions amongst my peers, and certainly the majority of high school graduates are little cases of arrested development today, but not "all", I can think of at least a few other friends/associates who were very mature and adult already by the time they left high school. They are there, they exist.
Lobster at June 30, 2010 3:20 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/06/sperm-wail.html#comment-1728311">comment from LobsterI would say I was an adult at 15.
Amy Alkon at June 30, 2010 3:28 PM
Lobster, I guess I misspoke when I said "peers." I didn't mean everyone that was my age at that time. I was referring to those in my social sphere.
I do mind that some of them justify their behaviour and shirk responsibility for their actions in adulthood by claiming that "everyone" at that age is still immature/young/stupid etc.
I don't think I was a clear as I could have been up there. That's not what I was saying. I'm the last person to make excuses for myself or anyone else. And I've always been mature. I don't think I was ever "young and stupid." My parents taught me how to think rationally and critically and I've always been able to put that to use. I never felt the burning need to do stupid stuff to rebel, and, despite some self-induced trouble in my college education, I've always been responsible (people used to comment on it when I was a kid).
But I still wasn't ready for the real world when I graduated high school. I was mature for my age, but I wouldn't have classified myself as an adult. Maybe my definition differs from yours, but I wouldn't have been able to live on my own and pay for myself at eighteen, no matter how critically I was able to think. I've worked at least part-time since I was fifteen, but a full-time job with rent, utilities, and insurance to pay would have knocked me on my ass. I'd have adapted, but I wouldn't have been ready. That's what I meant by not being psychologically an adult yet. And that's what I meant by continuing education prolonging adolescence.
And I'm with you on the "thinking" in reference to time sneaking up on women. That's actually the point I was trying to make.
NumberSix at June 30, 2010 9:03 PM
We should all take an object lesson from Sandra Bullock. She married a guy with it all: tattoos, a sewer mouth, a porn queen ex and everything that goes with it. And look what happened to her. Jeesh! Ya'd think that at least one fantasy Hollywood romance would work out.
Sometimes you can do everything right and still end up with a dud. Call it bad luck or just maybe the STRIKING INABILITY TO SPOT A BRIGHT ORANGE MARITAL TRAFFIC CONE.
I hate to seem bitter, but some women just really bring on their own misery by being breathtakingly stupid and blind.
Jesse at July 1, 2010 12:43 AM
"I certainly wasn't an adult when I graduated high school, no matter what the law says."
It really is our culture, I think. Years ago, I had a boat chartering business, and that's when I first noticed the vast difference between, for instance, a 21 yr old American man and a 21 year old South African man. One could barely function as a boat scrubber yet the other could captain a 75 ft yacht with ease. I was always impressed by how much more mature these guys were compared to their American peers.
I think it's that we don't let our kids do as much. We don't even allow them to work until they're 14, which is probably unheard of in most other cultures. The 21 yr old American is just barely learning to pick up after himself while the South African has already circumnavigated the globe. That was quite literally the situation in the boating industry, at least.
lovelysoul at July 1, 2010 4:41 AM
It seems obvious to me that women who wait until they are running out of time to have children before settling down are clearly more interested in having children and having someone to provide for those children than actually caring about a potential partner. Otherwise, if your objective is to find the love of your life what is the point of waiting until your biological clock is running out of time? If I know that I will most likely be able to father children for decades to come, do I then say 'oh cool, that means I can put my heart on ice for a while yet. I can tell my girlfriend to fuck off, and wait till I am middle-aged and can start over with a younger woman.' If you are really looking for love, what do biological time frames matter?
By definition, the only person who settles because they are running out of time is someone looking at things from a cold, business-like perspective, as if they were selling items on eBay that didn't attract as much interest as they would like.
Although in many ways men who are silly enough to fall for such women deserve what they get, as per a previous thread discussion on 'you get what you settle for'.
Nick S at July 1, 2010 6:05 AM
Nick I don't think that these women are actually waiting until the very last minute to find someone. They've probably been trying for a while, but haven't been successful. But I get what you're saying, regarding their tactics seeming like a business proposition. I have a girlfriend who has a 3yr plan that she presents to guys that she dates ( i.e. date 1yr, marry 2nd year, baby 3rd year). She doesn't understand why the men she meets are turned off by her approach. I suspect that it's because she's signaling that she sees them all as substitutable, that she'll marry almost anyone who meets her criteria. Having seen what happens to women like this once they've gotten what they want, I can't blame the men.
Janoodle at July 1, 2010 7:26 AM
My take on all this is that a biological clock is a wonderful thing to be born without.
Pirate Jo at July 1, 2010 8:35 AM
Ah lovelysoul, that would exclude the military.
They were, and are, perfectly happy to take 18 year olds and put them in life or death situations. Farm kids have it slightly better, since nobody is trying to kill them, but it's a hard and often hazardous life.
There are, to mischaracterize Michael Barone, two Americas. The difference is not always chronological. Some people will never be adults, even if they live to collect Social Security.
MarkD at July 1, 2010 9:41 AM
"It may sound bizarre, but I've noticed my guy doesn't smell bad to me. Sure, he sweats and I've been around him when he's dirty, working in the yard, etc, but it's never really unpleasant. His breath, too, is rarely bad, whereas my ex often seemed to have bad breath, at least to me."
Smell does seem to be an important factor re the study that says women on the pill are attracted to a man who often does not smell good to them after they are off the pill. Interestingly enough I have noticed that my 24 year old son smells just like my father did. He does not smell like his father, my husband of 29 years. Smell may be a way of people finding out who their best potential genetic mates are and it is probably underrated in modern society with obsessive bathing, perfumes, deodorants, men's cologne etc. I like a man who smells of nothing more than slight scent of laundry soap, in clean practical clothes like blue jeans and cotton shirts. A little sweat is fine. But of course, that is just me. I have two close male friends that I travel with frequently. They both smell good to me too. Isabel
Isabel1130 at July 1, 2010 10:41 AM
"I didn't mean everyone that was my age at that time. I was referring to those in my social sphere."
OK, sorry, I had indeed mis-interpreted it as the former rather than the latter (I have met plenty people who do actually say things like that 'on behalf of' everyone).
Lobster at July 1, 2010 2:26 PM
"I have a girlfriend who has a 3yr plan that she presents to guys that she dates ( i.e. date 1yr, marry 2nd year, baby 3rd year)"
Ew, what a turn-off, I agree.
Lobster at July 1, 2010 2:32 PM
I've had conversations along these lines with a close friend (we're both 31, I'm married with 1 kid, she's separated, in a string of strange relationships, for lack of a better word), my friend is feeling her clock ticking loudly, she was planning on having a baby with her current bf (for whom she moved far away from home, family, etc, without going too well.
Anyway, I always say not to settle, life is tough enough in a couple (more so with kids involved), that if there isnt a strong base of love, understanding, communication etc, it's no wonder so many couples fail.
For what it's worth, my husband and I have been together for nearly 8 years, and I still definitely feel that "zing", most days atleast!
Jessika at July 1, 2010 3:20 PM
MarkD
What is the point of your post? I have been with these 19-20 year olds and they have a maturity that far outstrips anything I have seen in the world. MOst recently in Afghanistan and they do just fine. Even exemplary.
Richard Cook at July 1, 2010 7:49 PM
I have met plenty people who do actually say things like that 'on behalf of' everyone.
Ugh, me, too. I hate that. I think it's like I was saying over on the "Vegan Pussy" thread: some people need others to validate their own choices. So, I guess using the "young and stupid" excuse makes people feel better because they project their own choices onto others in the attempt to make it a universal truth. I've never used the "young and stupid" excuse myself. Probably because my daddy told me all kinds of stories about when he was young and stupid and made sure I knew what bad choices they were. Plus, I'm a huge geek and not a rabid partier, so I'd have rather stayed in than gone out and gotten drunk. I even skipped our graduation party because it was just going to be booze, a bonfire, and a bunch of sophomore crashers.
NumberSix at July 1, 2010 9:03 PM
My high school graduation party a guy got drunk on 'trash can punch' beat a man to death wth a flashlight in front of his children and was lucky to get life instead of the needle
lujlp at July 2, 2010 7:20 AM
"So, I guess using the "young and stupid" excuse makes people feel better because they project their own choices onto others in the attempt to make it a universal truth."
Well put - that's exactly it that bothers me when people do that.
Lobster at July 2, 2010 7:39 AM
As people mature, hopefully they grow less shallow. Most teens are not that interesting. They do not have enough life experience to be much of anything. Yet. Not only that but they do not have an appreciation for anyone that does have depth. Appeal can be very shallow. Dimples? Cute butt?
As people grow and develop they (hopefully) not only become more interesting, they appreciate those that also become more interesting. So kids that were geeky misfits in middle school and high school, those picked last for the team and not asked to the dance, also develop appeal. People learn to appreciate other strengths that were less important to their teen selves. Things like integrity, wit, morals, dependability, responsibility and yes, earning power (and the stability it can engender).
This is why many people seem to blossom later. It is not only physical. The self-confidence that develops as a person matures and gets some experience to them is appealing. People appreciate themselves more and others find them more interesting, too.
If you have a 30 something woman that is judging a potential husband with the same criteria she did at age 16 for a boyfriend... Ick.
Some people are stuck in the shallow pond they lived in as teens. Others move on to swim in deeper waters.
LauraLouise at July 2, 2010 8:22 AM
I suspect that maturity does play a role in the singleton phenomenon. From my own experience, a lot of women I've met who are in their later 30's, who've never married, seem kind of adolescent in their approach to evaluating men, and dating. They get hung up on things that are inconsequential, like whether you're the sort of person who likes Sex in the City, or listens to a certain band. It's as though they still see themselves as part of a high school clique.
People tend to assume that women are always more mature than men, but IMO this is only true until about 25 or so. Men seem to catch up after that, and many women get stuck. Maybe it's the pressure to remain youthful.
Mark Bing at July 2, 2010 6:49 PM
I am older than most of the posters here, my son is 25 years old and I am divorced. I would like to find some one I could trust. All past relationships have faltered on the issue of friendship. I don't want to be in another one where I have to watch everything I say so as not to hurt a fragile ego. Also don't want every conversation to be an argument.
The one thing I would want would be someone I could
trust with a weapon with out having to look behind me.
fatfred at July 2, 2010 7:20 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/06/sperm-wail.html#comment-1729018">comment from fatfredThe one thing I would want would be someone I could trust with a weapon with out having to look behind me.
Sorry, my boyfriend's taken.
Amy Alkon at July 2, 2010 7:35 PM
"Women are generally attracted to high-status men because they desire status and historically try to attain 'status by proxy' through mate choice; however, simply viewing men as beneath you is another way of tricking your ego into thinking it has attained that status already - if you're 'above' men instead of attaining status 'through' a man, then it must mean your position in the status hierarchy is apparently even higher."
What about men who are attracted to high-status women? A colleague of mine and I have the same problem. We qualify as "high-status" women--good education, good income, etc., and we're both in good shape physically. We're both 50 and in the last few years we've both noticed that we're attracting a lot of men--so maybe we shouldn't complain?--but they're almost all financially strapped (via divorce) or just less responsible (than we are) in terms of getting their lives together.
My opinion is that gender is less an issue than an individual's need or desire to be taken care of. Men do a lot of picking and choosing based on need (for money and status) too and I know from experience because I'm being "chosen" a lot more often now than I even was in my 20s! It's hard not to believe that my increase in status and wealth has played a role in this.
Women aren't the only ones wanting to "gain status by proxy". Sometimes, it really is a question which partner is willing to work harder at ANYTHING, never mind the just relationship. And some of us already work hard at our jobs--we're not looking for a mate/project, which is why we might turn down a man who isn't on the same page as us. It's called "too much work!"
I.E. at July 3, 2010 7:18 AM
#6: "I'd have adapted, but I wouldn't have been ready. That's what I meant by not being psychologically an adult yet."
Well, what does "ready" mean here? I can't parse anything but "Potentially capable of profiting from further unearned resources". Is there more?
My first rental space was a wedge under a stairwell, that was my freshman year in college. I was 16, and so very not ready. But if I stayed in my home situation, very bad things would have happened. I did what I had to do.
Independence isn't easy. You don't have to like it. You don't even have to thrive. You just have to do it. And there's no particular reason for anybody to care whether or not you felt ready.
--
phunctor
phunctor at July 3, 2010 8:21 AM
phunctor, I'm not sure why you read so much into my post. I said nothing about being stuck in a home situation like yours or being forced to be on my own. I said nothing about whether anyone should care that I wasn't ready. I also didn't have to do it. I had financial support and I was going to college. Should I have not gone and gotten a minimum-wage job and a rental under the stairs like you? I didn't have to, thank God. I didn't have a bad home situation to get out of. I am not whining about not being ready, so I will just assume that your life experiences are coloring what I typed in my post.
NumberSix at July 3, 2010 8:10 PM
I.E., it is silly to suggest, as you seem to be doing, that women are judged according to their status and financial success to the same extent men are. I don't think any reasonable fair-minded person seriously believes that. My girlfriend is 24. She still lives with her parents, doesn't have a car, just started university, and has struggled to hold a reasonable job all her life (she currently works part-time in a fairly menial job). But frankly, I couldn't care less about any of that. All I care about is that she is a kind and decent person, is fun to be with, has a sense of humor, and treats me well. (And this is not for wont of choice either. I could have a successful professional woman if I wanted. I know a few such women socially who are in their late 30's, available, and who, I am informed by mutual acquaintances, like me.)
Men are generally attracted to youth and beauty in women, so if you are a 50yo woman you are probably not going to attract a sugar daddy. That is why you need to put out more on the financial side in order to remain competitive in the market, and only seem to attract fortune-hunters (There are indeed male golddiggers, though they are fewer than female golddiggers).
It is also silly to suggest that men gain 'status by proxy' by going after successful women. Men don't gain status by pursuing successful women in the same way that, say, a woman with a successful husband gains status by proxy. What these men do gain though, is the opportunity to shake down women desperate for some attention. Such men don't gain status. They are seen as cads. But they do get the opportunity to gain economically, and if you are an unscrupulous man this is not a bad past time.
I am not deliberately trying to put you down here. I am just stating the facts of life, which I guess no-one ever told you about. It is kind of amusing that you come here and brag about your ability to attract losers, and then offer this up as some kind of evidence to refute the views of others here, when what you offer is really entirely consistent with what I and others already believe to be the case.
Nick S at July 4, 2010 3:33 AM
I can forgive some of your short-sightedness because you're obviously young. There's a wholoe world of women out there like me, who work hard, have never thought of finding a sugar-daddy and generally have a lot to offer, which is what these men obviously see too. In my mind, as in my colleagues, we're a whole package. It might shock you, but yes, a 50 year old who's in good shape can still be attractive to men.
But seriously, if you really think all men are after is youth and beauty, I suggest you follow the marriage records of any midzie town. You'll see who's marrying who and I can guarantee you, you'll be in for a surprise. I did that for year when I lived in such a town because the local paper had a column htat listed marriage announcements along with the ages of the people involved.
The whole youth and beauty myth really is just that: a myth bought into by susceptible people who haven't been alive on the planet long enough to know better.
That I might have to "put out" financially is insulting, but like I said, it's obvious that you're young. Wait until you are in your mid-40s, supporting some kids (either in a marriage or out) and look back at what you've written. You're going to cringe, trust me.
ie at July 4, 2010 5:37 AM
IE, I am not that young. I'm 31. But thanks for assuming I am younger than I am.
"I can forgive some of your short-sightedness because you're obviously young. There's a wholoe world of women out there like me, who work hard, have never thought of finding a sugar-daddy and generally have a lot to offer, which is what these men obviously see too. In my mind, as in my colleagues, we're a whole package."
I love how you offer up these men as being of the highest character and arbiters of good taste. You already said that the men who pursue you and your friends are "almost all financially strapped (via divorce) or just less responsible (than we are) in terms of getting their lives together.". Sorry, you already belled the cat. Apparently, you only attract losers. But hey, it must be because you are such a great catch! And all these losers have such great taste!
"That I might have to "put out" financially is insulting, but like I said, it's obvious that you're young. Wait until you are in your mid-40s, supporting some kids (either in a marriage or out) and look back at what you've written. You're going to cringe, trust me."
I am not sure what the hell the point of this is. If I want kids, I don't know how shacking up with a 50yo woman is a good plan. Unless your point is that I should forget about having kids, and just have some fun with a cougar instead.
Nick S at July 4, 2010 6:17 AM
IE,
I'm 38, which is think is old enough to have gained some self-awareness. I tend to agree with Nick's thinking here. A fifty-year-old woman, regardless of the amount of money or "status" she brings, is simply not going to have the choices in men that a younger woman has. This is true even if the younger woman has little money and no status. Thus, you and your friends end up being approached by guys who are basically hanging onto the bottom rung - men who, by your own description, are insolvent and/or irresponsible and in need of a sugar mama. But these guys are hardly the cream of the male crop, so let's not pretend that dating them is some kind of unqualified success in life.
I'm two years out of a marriage to a woman my age. But I have found that I prefer to date women in their late twenties, for the most part. I have my own money and reasonable status, and am solvent and responsible, so I don't give a damn if they have little money or status. What I do care about is that they have a fresh outlook on life, are physically attractive and in shape, and don't carry the bitterness and baggage that so many older women seem to have.
I have female friends around my age and older, and there is no way in hell I'd date any of them, no matter how successful they may be in the professional sphere. They all have baby rabies, $150 worth of checked baggage, and/or have let themselves go physically. These women do tend to attract low-end men who have no money or status, which seems to fit with what you mentioned about the men you and your friends attract. They WANT better, of course, but higher-status guys just aren't interested.
MikeInRealLife at July 4, 2010 12:27 PM
Mike, I agree with everything you say. Especially about how older women are often bitter. It is noticeable just in their general demeanor. Women in their 20s will often come across as being pleasant, friendly and upbeat. Women in their 30s and 40s often seem to have a jaded, sullen, demeanor.
As for IE's arguments, to suggest that women are judged according to their financial success and status just as much as men or that it is a "myth" that men are attracted to youth and beauty is ludicrous. This flies in the face of the most basic principles of evolution and natural selection.
It is kind of funny that she adopts the posture of being so wise and experienced, and yet she is so willfully ignorant of basic realities of life and cannot even work out why she is only attracting a certain type of man. Of course, if one is genuinely wise it will be evident in the wisdom of what they say. They don't need to go around telling others how wise they are.
Nick S at July 4, 2010 2:43 PM
Like I said, check out the marriage records for any midsize town and do this for at least a few months. Seriously. Do some research, guys!
ie at July 4, 2010 3:14 PM
IE, since you have set us homework, I have some for you. Look up the words "virtue" and "necessity". Wikipedia should suffice.
Nick S at July 4, 2010 3:17 PM
Hmmmm...I don't believe in nasty online debates. It's too easy to take swipes at people when you don't have to actually face them.
I'm just presenting a different view and I honestly don't understand why it's making the two of you fellas so angry. Why should it matter to you if someone of my age is having a good time being single? There are tons of guys out there my age who are single too and for all sorts of reasons, divorce of course being the most prevalent. And, if I or my colleague decide to not follow through with a guy, then it's our loss, right? Plenty of fish and all that?
I used to dislike the term "high maintenance" because it was used so often to describe only women. But, getting older myself, I realize that the term can be applied to men. Some of them are just too much darned work. And I'm sure that there are women out there--still--who fit that bill too. If men turn away from high maintenance women--and for good reason--why can't a woman do the same?
It's not about gender, guys! I said that in my first post--it's about who's willing to do the work. And some of us just aren't attracted to slouches and prefer to be single until we find someone who isn't one. Is this really something worth getting angry over?
And Happy 4th of July! Shouldn't you guys be out partying or something and not on the internet? I'm from Canada, so we've had our national fete already this week. Bonne Fete mon amis!!!
ie at July 4, 2010 4:04 PM
ie, these guys are attracted to you for two reasons.
1. You are in good shape for your age - it would be very different if you were overweight and stopped taking care of yourself, whereas wealthy, overweight men rarely have a hard time finding a woman ready to be the next Mrs. so-and-so.
2. These guys are broke, so the women they really want (beautiful women their age and younger) aren't interested in them, due to the fact that women naturally seek men who can provide for them. The women who really do 'have it all' going for them have a large selection of more-worthy suitors to choose from, so there's no way they're settling for the guys paying alimony to half a dozen ex-wives or who plan on using their newly acquired girlfriend's income to support a lifestyle they can't afford.
Its good that your happy, that you're financially secure, and that you're in great shape in a society where more and more women begin to let themselves go after the age of 30. However, you yourself have said that these men are broke, so don't try and kid yourself into thinking that their the type of guy most women would want (I, as a young woman, think they all sound like poor decision makers, either about what to spend money on or about who to marry, and such an attribute combined with debt is a HUGE turnoff and a warning that these men would not be good people to be in a relationship with).
Lauren at July 4, 2010 4:22 PM
"but they're almost all financially strapped (via divorce) or just less responsible (than we are) in terms of getting their lives together"
While I don't generally agree with you (and certainly disagree when you suggest men craving youth and beauty is a myth), I do get the feeling that perhaps over the past few 'post-feminist' generations, the percent of men willing to 'leech off of' a woman may have increased. In the 'old days', so to speak, there was great pressure placed on men to be "the provider" and not on women, and for a man to leech off a woman was considered shameful ... I could be wrong but I have this perception that these values aren't exercised nearly as strongly anymore, and a surprising number of women seem to 'put up with' men who leech off them, and it's not frowned upon as much as it used to be (or I'm just getting exposed to more and more cases, I don't know). What you think you're seeing might be partially a symptom of this. The way divorce/alimony laws are exercised these days ("bleed 'im dry") probably also tends to leave a lot more older divorced men cash-strapped and thus with less choice (and a side effect of laws that bleed you dry is that you would *naturally* feel less inclined to work for your money after that ... it's logical, if you get to keep the money you earn when working, you work harder ... the less you get to keep the fruit of your efforts, the less incentive you have to bother to work ... probably many divorced men just start thinking to themselves "why even bother working so hard, the more I earn the more they take anyway ... might as well look for someone who wouldn't need to bleed me further" (or perhaps they might even feel some 'justice' in getting money back from a woman). In general though a man who isn't struggling will prefer an attractive younger woman if given the choice.
"We qualify as "high-status" women--good education, good income, etc., and we're both in good shape physically. We're both 50"
Well there you said it yourself, you're in good shape physically; presuming that is true, that there would be why you're still attracting more men than you might expect at 50 -- but the fact is that the majority of 50-year old women are *not* particularly attractive ... just because men might be after you at 50, does not mean that that means men are also lusting equally after all 50-year old women with as much money ... just the attractive ones.
FTR, I'm 33 and fairly financially successful. Nearly the only women that 'catch my eye' are 'hot young things', all the way --- and I don't care how much money they have at all --- apart from youthful attractiveness, I want qualities like kindness. And since I want to start a family and have kids still, she has to have some child-bearing years ahead of her. I'm currently dating a 32-year old who, while perhaps not as eye-catching as I'd hope, has a really good heart and a few other rare qualities personality-wise that are very important to me. If she quit her job and lived off me, it wouldn't bother me so long as she'd be a good mother to my future kids, I have zero interest in money from her. Anyway, very rarely, I might see someone of up to around age 40 that I perceive as attractive --- BUT, even when I do: (1) I would mentally 'wish'/prefer that same woman be 20 years younger anyway, and (2) for every 40-ish woman I see that I find attractive enough to think 'yeah, do-able', there are, and I'm not exaggerating at all, I'll see at *least* 1000 sub-25-year-old women that make me think 'yeah, do-able'. The ratio is at least 1000 to 1 - no joke. Just today I was walking on the beach and literally dozens of 'pretty young things' caught my eye. But I can even remember that the last time I saw a 40-ish woman nearly as eye-catching as any of those I saw today was in May (and she was with her far more attractive daughter so it was one of those 'hmm yeah i'd do her and her mom' moments --- apologies for the horrible crudeness, that's how men think in secret :). And 50? No way. It would literally have to be Madonna -- sorry. And even then, I'd wish she was 'her but younger', as with basically any woman over 28 or so, 'her, but younger' would probably always be better to almost any man than 'her'. I think often, for women, even if they like a man, they may prefer 'him, but richer' over 'him', or 'him, but better-looking' --- but extremely rarely, 'him, but younger'.
A man with little or no money, what does he really have to offer a woman, of any age? Unless he's super hot, I cannot think of anything.
Lobster at July 4, 2010 4:53 PM
"We qualify as "high-status" women--good education, good income, etc., and we're both in good shape physically. We're both 50"
I actually find 'keeping yourself in good shape' quite an attractive quality in a woman, in and of itself. But it's fairly rare.
Lobster at July 4, 2010 5:00 PM
"very rarely, I might see someone of up to around age 40 that I perceive as attractive"
OK, not forgetting Amy here as being one of those ;)
Lobster at July 4, 2010 5:03 PM
Heh, IE, what makes you think I'm angry? Recognizing simple reality shouldn't make anyone angry, and it certainly doesn't affect me.
Marriage records in a midsize town? Okay. I'm not sure glancing at the marriage announcements in the newspaper is a great way to "research" average marrying age, and I am further shocked that such pages even still exist, though I admittedly read the news online. In any case, I live in a major city (Phoenix) that is absolutely loaded with good-looking young women, and so I have little need to settle for someone older than I prefer. One women I am dating is 29, and I had a lovely time dancing last night with a 27-year-old woman. People in small towns obviously have fewer options, though, and may have to settle for someone who is not exactly what they like.
In any case, IE, unless I missed it, I don't see where you've seriously addressed the issue of attracting these impoverished male leeches. If women in the 50+ age group are able to attract so many men, why are you and your friends dating the AARP versions of Dante Hicks?
MikeInRealLife at July 4, 2010 5:48 PM
Lobster you may have a very strong preference for youthful features. I'm only a few years older than you, and am notoriously picky, but don't experience such a pronounced preference for young women.
Personally I've found that a lot of women reach a sweet spot in their early to mid 30's, appearance wise. Also women who look good at this age tend to remain attractive as they get older, while many women who are pretty when they're in their twenties will often look dramatically different by their mid thirties.
Something else to keep in mind is that American women, and Anglo women generally, have a bad habit of letting themselves go, almost to an extreme. But this isn't true of other cultures.
If you want to treat yourself, take a trip to a city like Prague. You'd be amazed at what older women can look like.
Martin at July 4, 2010 6:00 PM
Or La Belle Province, specifically Montreal, which, because of its French culture, is very different from the rest of North America. Maybe I should have said this earlier--it might have saved us all some time: It's where I live.
So much of the information that's flying around here in this debate--which Good God I had no idea would start--is just good 'ole sexist thinking. Women are like this, men are like that...yadda, yadda, yadda. If you're 50 men only want you because you have money, they must be losers, etc.
The men I'm talking about are not ex-pimps with 12 kids with 8 different women. They have jobs, cars and sometimes their own homes, but are struggling financially because of family (usually divorce) situations. I'm not in that predicament and so am not sure I want to finance someone (even partially) who is. I believe that's my right.
It's the same with my colleague. She had her kids young and now wants someone with the same advantages and freedoms she enjoys. There are a lot of divorced men out there and so, believe it or not, we can be a bit choosy. I really am just reporting both of our experiences so I don't get what all the uproar is about. Seriously!
I keep telling you all to check the marriage stats because it's information that's based in reality, hard data that is very hard to argue with. Another thing you might do is ask someone in retail who works specifically with wedding gowns. Why? Ask them how many size 18 - 22s they sell. I can save you the trouble since there is such a huge garment industry here and I know people in it: a lot are sold and it's not supermodels who are buying them.
So, my point is that love is not just for the young and the thin and the beautiful.
And before you guys start bashing me again, ask yourself this question: if your mother were to become single again (or if she is right now) would you say these things to her or would you wish her well in finding another life partner? Would you be as mean-spirited as you're being with me or would you want her to be happy?
And why aren't you people out celebrating your nation's birthday?
ie at July 4, 2010 7:20 PM
IE, I am not particularly angry about anything you wrote. I just find it tiresome having to refute the same old falsehoods, that's all.
Does anyone else on the board seriously want to second IE's apparent claim that women are judged according to their status and financial success just as much as men, or that men are not attracted to youth and beauty?
And I'm not celebrating 4th of July as I don't live in the United States.
Nick S at July 5, 2010 1:24 AM
I think I'm living in a parallel universe that's a lot more diverse and interesting than the one you're living in, Nick S. I don't say that to be harsh, but maybe opening up your eyes a bit would make my words a bit more believable to you?
Life takes interesting and sometimes unexpected turns. I know that for my colleague and I, our lives aren't following quite the route we expected, which is what makes it all so new and interesting for us. The feminist movement of the 80s--with all its energy and vigour--was bound to pay some dividends of a second wave sort, and I think this is exactly what I'm describing here. It's just that it's so unexpected, which is why I suspect I'm getting all this grief!
There was an article in a Canadian social sciences journal a few years ago entitled something like "The new trophy wife," which went on to say that women in their 50s, with careers (and by implication, wealth) were the new version of the trophy wife. The author had followed marriage stats in Toronto over a period of several years and that's what the stats told her. Which is why I keep emphasizing the fact that hard data is important here.
These women were the desirable "second-time around" choice for marriage. I found it interesting, but at the time, was younger and less interested in the topic. Since then, however, I've come to see that there's a lot of truth to it.
The last conversation my colleague and I had went something like this: we actually felt some affinity with rich older guys because now we had some idea of what their dating life must be like: how could they tell the difference between someone who wanted them for them and someone who was interested in them for their wealth? And yes, like them, we have some choice.
If you had asked me 20 years ago if I would be having this conversation now, at 50, I would have laughed and thought you were crazy. But like I said, life takes interesting turns sometimes. And, really, it comes down to one partner desiring to be cared for by another. I really do think it's less about gender and more about wanting comfort.
As for younger women with older or slightly older men, I can't speak for a lot of those situations because I always dated men my own age. But I can say that I've seen some younger women take on the older divorced guy with the kids and the financial struggle and I don't envy them one bit. I've also seen the younger woman with the older single guy who's really just very interested in having a partner he can control. Not all these younger women/older guy relationships are bad, but when I look at them, most of the time, I'm very grateful for the life (and the freedom) I have instead.
I'm just positing a different perspective here. How about exhibiting a bit of open-mindedness?
ie at July 5, 2010 3:56 AM
"Lobster you may have a very strong preference for youthful features."
Possibly yes, I might not be the norm. On the other hand, people in real life match up with what they CAN get, not with what necessarily floats their boat the most. There's a reason that so many products are advertised with models who are around the age of 20. And why men with loads of money tend to score comparatively younger women much more frequently. I wasn't talking about the compromise point where "ideal" meets "pragmatic reality", I was just talking about *idealistic* preference to make a point ... though it's thanks to pragmatic reality that the majority of people who don't happen to be amongst that tiny percentage of 'most desirable mates' can still find satisfactory partnerships. Being able to find satisfactory partnerships doesn't mean you're necessarily somehow in a greatly desired demographic. In real life there are also issues like matching mental maturity levels, which seems to be relatively important to most people.
"Personally I've found that a lot of women reach a sweet spot in their early to mid 30's, appearance wise. Also women who look good at this age tend to remain attractive as they get older, while many women who are pretty when they're in their twenties will often look dramatically different by their mid thirties."
That is very true, have also noticed that. Like the expression goes, ripe early, rotten early.
"If you want to treat yourself, take a trip to a city like Prague. You'd be amazed at what older women can look like."
I've not been to Prague but have been to several Western European countries and was indeed amazed ... women in many of those countries (UK excepted) really look after themselves much better and take better care of their appearance. But even there, my preference was for younger women - early 20's would be the 'sweet spot' for me, appearance-wise. I also rather fancy Asian women, who tend to (presumably largely genetically, but no doubt also diet etc.) have much "younger"-looking bodies than their Western/white counterparts of the same age.
Lobster at July 5, 2010 6:25 AM
I wonder if Amy caught a boyfriend in bed with two of her girlfriends.
BOTU at July 5, 2010 10:21 AM
WONDERFUL column, Amy! Thank you.
trina at July 5, 2010 10:33 AM
What bothers me about the idea of settling when you're getting older and desperate to have children is that it's all about YOU. YOUR fantasy, YOUR wish for motherhood, YOU YOU YOU. Not about the children you'll potentially be having, or whether he'll be a good father, or if your home life will be harmonious and a good environment for your children.
Choika at July 5, 2010 10:45 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2010/06/sperm-wail.html#comment-1729620">comment from BOTUI wonder if Amy caught a boyfriend in bed with two of her girlfriends.
That's because you have nothing intelligent to say, but can't stand not having people's attention. Mommy not give you enough titty when you were a tiny anus of a boy?
And thanks, trina!
Amy Alkon at July 5, 2010 10:55 AM
IE I think that it's more likely that you are an attractive woman who men like to be with, rather than the fulcrum of a new social evolutionary phenomenon ;)
What you're experiencing isn't so unusual. Couples tend to be near each other in age. Where you typically see larger age differences is when an older man wants to have children. Otherwise people usually date and have relationships with others who are relatively close in age. So perhaps the marriages that you assumed were unusual actually aren't.
As for these studies you reference, did they actually determine the motives for these marriages? The marriage rate for people over 40 is very low, and declines with age. So even minor shifts in behavior can have major effects on an analysis. The infrequency of marriage at this age, in and of itself, argues against the idea that 50 year old women are the new trophy wives. Also the social sciences are notoriously lazy when it comes to empirical analysis. You should take any claim made by a social scientist with several grains of salt.
Martin at July 5, 2010 11:41 AM
"The feminist movement of the 80s--with all its energy and vigour--was bound to pay some dividends of a second wave sort, and I think this is exactly what I'm describing here. It's just that it's so unexpected, which is why I suspect I'm getting all this grief!"
You are getting grief because you posted this bullshit about how women are judged according to their success and financial status just as much as men, and that men do not have a preference for youth and beauty. Some of us do get tired of debunking the same old falsehoods over and over again.
You are entitled to your own lifestyle. You are not entitled to your own basic facts about evolution and natural selection of the species.
And talk about the "energy and vigour" of feminism is vacuous nonsense. You should know better than to still be spouting trite girl power! cliches at 50.
Nick S at July 5, 2010 2:23 PM
Oh man...I can't write anything else useful here so I give up. Good luck Nick S. and whoever else felt the need to be disagreeable. Gotta go!
ie at July 5, 2010 2:53 PM
Oops. Sounds like a sore topic. Was it the handsome running back?
BOTU at July 5, 2010 6:10 PM
"What bothers me about the idea of settling when you're getting older and desperate to have children is that it's all about YOU. YOUR fantasy, YOUR wish for motherhood, YOU YOU YOU. Not about the children you'll potentially be having, or whether he'll be a good father, or if your home life will be harmonious and a good environment for your children."
Yup. But that 'ME ME ME' mentality is probably often a big part of the reason why these people reached that age without managing to find someone that would settle down and breed with them in the first place. Being ultra-picky when younger is in some ways another symptom of the same mentality.
Lobster at July 6, 2010 2:27 PM
This has probably been said above already and it's likely going to sound unnecessarily harsh but I'll take my chances...
I know an awful lot of women who spent their 20s dismissing, disparaging and generally disrespecting every decent guy who showed the slightest bit of interest. (Honestly, it was as though if the guy like them, he obviously wasn't good enough.)
The same women are now in their mid- to late-30s and all I hear from them are complaints about how there are no good guys around, how men are superficial, how they only go after young women, etc, etc. In some cases, they are complaining about the EXACT SAME MEN they wouldn't have had five minutes for a decade ago.
I know it's a bummer to awaken to the sudden realization that you probably aren't going to be a mom... but the universe has a very well developed sense of irony. C'est la vie.
ehtrain at July 8, 2010 1:05 PM
Honestly, it was as though if the guy like them, he obviously wasn't good enough.)
And men remember this, at least I do, and it does affect how I treat women.
The basic frustration of dealing with women through your twenties and thirties is that when you want them, they don't want you, but then when they come around to wanting you, you don't want them.
By your thirties, almost all of the women who are good candidates for settling down with are gone, often to men a bit older than you are. So you have a surplus of men and a deficit of attractive women. This is probably the dominant factor that motivates men to date younger. Older women like to tell themselves that it's just a physical attraction, but you'll notice that the girls that older guys choose are often kind of plain - I'm talking about normal men, not billionaires or rock stars. What they're looking for is a nice girl who hasn't been around the block 1800 times and doesn't have the accompanying baggage.
Toby at July 12, 2010 8:57 AM
Leave a comment