--Hung Jury

Doubt gets a bad rap. Doubting love doesn't mean you've stopped loving, but that you've started thinking. Sheep doubt nothing. Chances are you'll get further in life by questioning things than by living like something that ends up dinner and a sweater.

You say this guy's "theoretically" everything you want, which is super if you're looking to live theoretically ever after. Of course, theoretically is pretty much how you've been living. You're both swamped at school and see each other once a month. If you've been in school throughout your three years together, you've had, what, 36 dates? If so, more than anything, what you have together is a lack of information.

Because most people change a great deal between 20 and 30, pledging to spend the rest of your life with somebody at 23 is like asking a 6-year-old what she wants to be when she grows up, and holding her to it. (You try finding tooth fairy jobs in the classifieds.) Your 20s should be your "Who am I?" years. Until you get that answered reasonably well, you shouldn't be moving ahead in any serious way to "Who am I with?" -- not even if you find dating only somewhat more enjoyable than having all your toes pulled off with white-hot pliers.

Dating to find somebody you love is what you do after you've dated enough to get a handle on all the stuff you hate. Falling in love is easy; staying in love takes some doing, especially the 320,000th time you find yourself hearing those "grand plans." Only when you take stock of somebody's worst qualities, and decide you can live with them, are you ready to commit. Get married without doing that, and maybe you aren't really saying "I do," but "You'll do."

At this point, a wiser approach would be a more Amish one -- and no, I don't mean tossing all your lightbulbs, donning a bonnet and churning butter. They have this practice called "Rumspringa" -- a "running around" period for Amish teens to dabble in modern culture: smoke, drink, date, and wear zippers. Experiencing what's out there helps them make an informed decision -- whether to stay modern or go back and live Amish. You, likewise, might propose a period of time where you both date around so you can get a better sense of whether you're with him because you've been with him or whether you're actually choosing him over a bunch of others. If you keep seeing him, avoid pledging to be together forever until you're reasonably sure you'll still want to be together at 27 -- tempting as it is to respond to "Will you marry me?" with something a little more romantic than "Um, uhhh...look! A UFO!"

| Comments (212)

*

Comments

LW, why the rush? Yeah, dating pretty much sucks, if you're my age (53) but it should be fun when you're in your 20s! Don't be in such a hurry to find your "one true love"; you may have more than one or even 2 by the time you turn 30. Relax, enjoy, go with the flow. Have fun now, before it's too late! And if you do find that special someone, even if it's the one you're with now, great! But ease off yourself a little. You don't need that kind of pressure on top of everything else.

Posted by: Flynne at November 24, 2010 7:45 AM

Do your boyfriend a favor and break up with him now. You are already waiting for someone better to come along.

You just don't want to let go of one guy until the next one shows up, and that is not a decent way to treat someone.

Posted by: Spartee at November 24, 2010 7:54 AM

Because most people change a great deal between 20 and 30, pledging to spend the rest of your life with somebody at 23 is like asking a 6-year-old what she wants to be when she grows up, and holding her to it. (You try finding tooth fairy jobs in the classifieds.) Your 20s should be your "Who am I?" years.

I dunno, I'm going to respectfully disagree with this. All this "finding yourself" new age stuff doesn't sit well with me because really, it's an endless quest and a false one. You have also fallen into the mythology of "the one" a bit here though I don't think it was meant that way. Love is a choice, not something you "find" by flitting around wondering if you've found the perfect outfit yet. A big part of it is about maturity and making a decision to love that person no matter what - even when they hurt you, because it's likely that over time people will hurt each other. It's essential to develop a real capacity for forgiveness.

Another thing here is LW's view on doubt. You will always have doubts and you will always hear whispers of "maybe he's not the one.... maybe you should find someone else..." but you have to have the strength to face doubts and work through them. Don't let every doubt spell "the end" and just take it slow. Keep seeing this guy and take it slow. If you are saying, however, that "theoretically" means you don't find yourself sexually attracted to him, you may need to step back and re-examine first what you do find sexually attractive and is this good. Are you sexually attracted to "theoretically" not good? If so, you need to sort that out if you expect to have a lasting, stable marriage and before you inflict yourself on someone else. I don't mean that to sound harsh, so take it or leave it, but I speak from experience. Life isn't all about "fun" - unless you're two years old.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 8:02 AM

All this "finding yourself" new age stuff doesn't sit well with me because really, it's an endless quest and a false one. You have also fallen into the mythology of "the one" a bit here though I don't think it was meant that way. Love is a choice, not something you "find" by flitting around wondering if you've found the perfect outfit yet. A big part of it is about maturity

Which you probably don't have at 23. You also are likely to change a good deal between 20 and 30. So, getting together with the person who's right for you at 23 is probably risky.

I was just telling the woman who edits me that I dated three pretty wonderful guys in my late 20s/around 30. These were three guys who are all probably 10-12 years older than I am. I think, with all of them, I just wasn't ready enough as a person for a relationship, and that's why the relationships petered out.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 24, 2010 8:07 AM

Indeed Amy, and this LW doesn't sound quite ready for a serious relationship either. I just felt that the way your advice sounded, it was sort of encouraging the immaturity to continue though looking for "the one" rather than forcing a deeper examination of motives and ability to form a lasting relationship. Then the comment about about "having fun" seemed like rather a shallow approach too. Obviously one needs to build fun into a marriage, but having fun by using dates as amusement isn't quite that is it.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 8:11 AM

"Also, he's willing to move thousands of miles to be with me; I can't say I'd do the same."

Based on this statement, I'd say you're not ready to marry at all and that's not a bad thing. It's not about this particular instance if moving across contry, but if you're going to marry someone you have to be in a mindset of compromise and being willing to put someone else first sometimes.

You want to be able to please yourself - and really, there's no reason not to at your stage. I think your doubts are not so much about dating other guys but being free to live experiences and snatch opportunities as and when you want, as and when they arise.

Posted by: AntoniaB at November 24, 2010 8:12 AM

Hahaha - I was writing that as you were posting about being ready for a serious relationship!

Posted by: AntoniaB at November 24, 2010 8:13 AM

Another thing is that people can change at any time in life. I'm 38 and am in the process of converting to Catholicism after being more or less a lifelong atheist. So where do you draw the line on "discovering who you are"? You run the risk of shutting yourself out of the market and damaging yourself through too many relationships if you wait too long, not to mention the possibility of lower fertility as you enter your 30s, if that's a concern.

Furthermore, with the idea of her going on "Rumschpringe", when the Amish do it they are coming from a solid base of faith and family; what does the LW have with which to armour herself besides flaky new age notions of "the one" and what her equally flaky friends tell her?

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 8:27 AM

Amy's advice was perfect!! Not enough time has been spent being around each other to form an idea of what you want. I've found that often long distance makes a relationship seem better because you don't have the day to day annoyances to deal with. Your 20's are a time to have fun, travel, get educated, figure out a career that will fulfill you, etc. I wish I had received this advice before I married at 23. Feel free to use me as proof of it being a huge mistake to marry so young and because you feel its the next step.

Posted by: Kristen at November 24, 2010 8:43 AM

a career that will fulfill you

LOL

I think I hear whispers....

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 8:49 AM

I agree with Thag, completely. (Although I agree with others that this particular relationship is probably not one to commit to right now.)

We have really extended adolecence to the point that is nearly absurd, and it certainly defies our evolution and nature. Waiting until our 30's to settle down (whatever that means) is fine if you're like Amy and don't want the marriage, kids, house in the 'burbs, etc., but it makes little sense for most people.

In continuing agreement with Thag, we can continue to grow and develop and change later in life, and well into marriage. The best kind of marriages are those where the two grow and develop together. I married at 21 (I'm 30 now), and neither one of us are the same people that we were, but we have shaped each other and are far better for it. I'm doubtful that people who are more "fully formed" can ever mesh as well. Many of my peers are only now contemplating marriage, and it is far more difficult for them to merge lives with another person.

In short, the LW should probably step back from this relationship, for both of their sakes, but she also should start thinking about growing up a little bit and realize that she's not hiding and doesn't need to "find herself" for the next several years.

Posted by: Lyssa at November 24, 2010 9:41 AM

I'm pretty sure he'll propose when we both graduate

I hate to be cynical, but...famous last words...

I do love him, but I once read that once you doubt the love, you've stopped loving that person forever.

I once read that people write a lot of shit (except me of course). Do you make all life decisions based on fortune cookie philosophy from pop psychology? That's not meant to be cruel LW, I suspect you know what you want to do and you're looking for justification. Do it as *your* decision, don't delegate to Dr Phil.

You, likewise, might propose a period of time where you both date around so you can get a better sense of whether you're with him because you've been with him or whether you're actually choosing him over a bunch of others.

I see the sense in this, but it's hard to do. How on earth do you tell someone you're committed to - and even if in this case they haven't had much physical time together there's phone calls, emotion, 3 years of history, etc involved - that you want to screw around for a while and maybe come back? None of my partners would have accepted that. You can go of course, but the crawl back is problematic.

Posted by: Ltw at November 24, 2010 9:43 AM

Doubts are fine, but you really don't sound thrilled with this person.

Posted by: NicoleK at November 24, 2010 9:46 AM

The best kind of marriages are those where the two grow and develop together. I married at 21 (I'm 30 now), and neither one of us are the same people that we were, but we have shaped each other and are far better for it. I'm doubtful that people who are more "fully formed" can ever mesh as well.

This is a really excellent, important and much missed point. This really is the point of marriage, IMO. I wish I'd known this when I was 21! Boy howdy, there's a lot of bad advice out there.

You are supposed to enrich each other, not shop around like you're buying a hat, trying each one on as you go until your hair is a matted mess and expect whoever you settle for in that state not to notice.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 10:03 AM

I think that Spartee's got it. If the LW isn't willing to move any distance to be with him, then she isn't really in love with him. It's not like she'd be giving up her ground breaking work on a malaria vaccine or something, she simply doesn't want to upset her lifestyle.

Her BF is probably in an ideal setting to meet someone new, who shares his interests, and is on his level socially and intellectually. She's keeping him from that.

But I've come to be very skeptical of the idea that women should devote their 20's to fooling around, and then get serious about finding a man in their 30's. Because from what I've seen, they often don't have the opportunity. They end up with men who are of a lower quality than the ones they'd been with when they were younger. This isn't true for everyone, of course, but it's common enough that it's worth acknowledging.

Posted by: Maurice at November 24, 2010 10:07 AM

Maurice, that's because a woman's market value is lower in her 30s than it was in her 20s.

Feminists aside (where they belong), this is the brutal reality. A man with any sense would rather have a 23-year-old woman who hasn't been, as Roissy would say, riding the alpha cock carousel for a decade (one hopes) than a woman with declining fertility who has likely been played a few times and has lost a certain ability to bond with a man. You don't have to like it, but them's the breaks.

People single past a certain age are generally that way for a reason, particularly when it comes to older women.

Bring out the venom and personal anecdotes to the contrary in 3...2...

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 10:13 AM

@Thag I know, just trying to be diplomatic ;)

What no one tells them is that the men their age are still going to want girls in their twenties. For some reason this is news to many women, even though they'd probably dated older guys at that age.

Posted by: Maurice at November 24, 2010 10:39 AM

Thag,
YES! YES! YES! You are so right. I hate all of this find yourself bullshit. Its fine if you have a goal and you want to work to achieve that goal before getting married, but this endless search for "the one" is crazy. I also agree that you can grow and change at any age. I am 41 and am constantly trying new things. That is what keeps marriage fresh.

I really hope LW comes out here to read all the comments bc there is a lot of wisdom out here today.

Posted by: sheepmommy at November 24, 2010 10:55 AM

"Waiting until our 30's to settle down (whatever that means) is fine if you're like Amy and don't want the marriage, kids, house in the 'burbs, etc., but it makes little sense for most people."

Maybe it's the marriage, kids, and house in the 'burbs that makes little sense for most people. Amy is part of a growing trend, and it's not because people are "extending adolescence" (what a condescending thing to say!) but because they are wising up.

Posted by: Pirate Jo at November 24, 2010 11:07 AM

it's not because people are "extending adolescence" (what a condescending thing to say!) but because they are wising up.

Really? What are they "wising up" to?

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 11:14 AM

"I'm pretty sure he'll propose when we both graduate... [but] he has grand plans and never follows through."

Anyone else catch this?

When I was in graduate school I had the same belief about my boyfriend. It didn't happen.

Posted by: ie at November 24, 2010 11:18 AM

Wising up to the fact that it's not for everyone. Getting married, having kids, and taking on a mortgage are not decisions that are easily (if at all) reversed.

If you think it's what you want at 23, fine. But think about it for a while longer. A few years down the road, if it's STILL what you want, go for it. The worst thing you have done is put it off for a while, which doesn't hurt anything. It's a far better alternative than jumping into something when you're too young and then regretting it later, when you're trapped.

Posted by: Pirate Jo at November 24, 2010 11:24 AM

But I've come to be very skeptical of the idea that women should devote their 20's to fooling around, and then get serious about finding a man in their 30's. Because from what I've seen, they often don't have the opportunity. They end up with men who are of a lower quality than the ones they'd been with when they were younger. This isn't true for everyone, of course, but it's common enough that it's worth acknowledging.

Same here (and I was really glad that Amy didn't pull out the phrase that she sometimes applies here, calling the 20's the "fuck years.")

The ideal is that you learn a lot about yourself and have these great experiences, but, from what I've seen, most women end up either 1) having a lot of easy sex that they get very little out of and feel bad about (there are certainly women that can psychologically deal well with promiscuity, but I think those are the minority), or 2) live with a single guy for a long period of time, but without a commitment (thus, taking themselves out of the dating pool and avoiding any of the benefits of experience they may have had, but still idling in this not committed, not progressing towards adulthood state).

In my observations, most women, particularly those who want the marriage, children, white picket fence ideal, do very poorly with these two options- they justify it to themselves, but seem to feel that they have compromised themselves for it. And when they get to the end of their 20's, they usually have no idea how to deal with it (recall Thag's points that, by 30, women are simply less desireable.) It's just another place where feminism and this "you can have it all" ideal has failed women who fall for it.

Posted by: Lyssa at November 24, 2010 11:30 AM

PJ, you can get "trapped" by any decision you make though and then you just have to deal with it. I could say I have gone the route you suggest, waiting until 29 to get married, ending up a lone parent, and now I can say I'm "trapped" in that just as someone else will say they are "trapped" in a marriage. I am sure attitude plays a large part in how you feel about things however they turn out. Did you read that blog about "whispers" that I posted a link to?

This prevailing attitude of marriage as a trap isn't helpful; somewhere we need to start talking about dealing with whatever unfolds and learning to accept it and make the best of it instead of thinking there's some magical path where all things work out right and there's nothing to lose by putting certain things off. That's not to say it can't work out if LW takes your suggestion and I'm not suggesting she do anything other than examine her own motives (and I don't mean "follow her heart", which is also BS), but to suggest there's nothing to lose is simply false, because you don't know that and neither do I.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 11:32 AM

live with a single guy for a long period of time, but without a commitment (thus, taking themselves out of the dating pool and avoiding any of the benefits of experience they may have had, but still idling in this not committed, not progressing towards adulthood state).

This is what I did - well, a sort of combination of your two options but the first definitely was not for me and it didn't take me long to figure that out. Both options are mistakes if you want a marriage and a family though, and you do end up damaged goods when you are finally "ready" (i.e. desperate enough to take whoever's there) to marry.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 11:37 AM

Maybe it's the marriage, kids, and house in the 'burbs that makes little sense for most people. Amy is part of a growing trend, and it's not because people are "extending adolescence" (what a condescending thing to say!) but because they are wising up.

You really don't think that most people don't want to have families, or that there's something wrong ("wising up") with wanting one? I never said that there's anything wrong with not wanting one, but you really have to accept that your and Amy's wants don't apply to the entire world.

And yes, playing around and delaying commitment because you're "not ready" for it, in your 20's, is extending adolescence. Teenagers are "not ready" for commitment. Adults can chose to commit or not, but they aren't playing around at finding themselves before they can be sure. The idea that someone with a college (almost doctorate level) education is "not ready" to commit is condescending. My statement was simply accurate.

Posted by: Lyssa at November 24, 2010 11:39 AM

"If the LW isn't willing to move any distance to be with him, then she isn't really in love with him. It's not like she'd be giving up her ground breaking work on a malaria vaccine or something, she simply doesn't want to upset her lifestyle."

The ambivalence in young people towards a mate or potential mate often surprises me.

When I was 23, if the woman I loved had asked me to move to a secluded jungle location, and give up a good chunk of my life, I likely would have started buying machetes and backpacks for the journey. She felt the same way. Those sorts of big tests do actually come about, when career goals conflict, and other large life decisions must be worked out, requiring significant compromises between the parties.

Without an intense, near-feral bond and loyalty to someone, how would you expect anything to last during the later many and sometimes steep ups and downs to come? People too often seem to think love for a mate is a mildly stepped-up version of a pretty good friendship. It ain't.

Posted by: Spartee at November 24, 2010 11:47 AM

I might add that I helped to ruin the life of the poor fool who married me too. No doubt he'd have ruined his own life without my help, but that doesn't change the facts., just like justifying sleeping with a married man with "if it wasn't me it would be someone else" doesn't make a woman less of a home wrecker. Now my kids have no father in their lives. Is that what you want for yourself and your kids? Are you going to look into the future thinking of yourself or your husband and kids? Don't be a fool.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 11:52 AM

Spartee, your last comment is right on.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 11:58 AM

What a negative, depressing, and utterly self-defeating worldview. That our experiences, relationships, and history only lead us to decline, to lose our ability to bond with others, to become a "matted mess," or "damaged goods."

Posted by: Pirate Jo at November 24, 2010 12:00 PM

I'm mostly pretty happy these days. It's all in how you look at it. I'd rather have the unvarnished truth than sugar coated lies.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 12:02 PM

Pirate jo, recognizing and accepting that life plays out differently than we would prefer is part of being an adult.

To acknowledge and accept such realities is not depressing or self-defeating, but the first step in better appreciating those things that are quite wonderful in life. It also is key in making choices about how we want to structure our lives.

Do you want a deep romantic commitment to a person who will return that commitment? If so, you likely have to give up your "play the field" option.

Do you want to increase your chances to have a family and spouse? If so, you likely have to make compromises on other time-intensive activities, like work and social activities.

And if you are a gal, then yes, you are likely better off pairing up with family-focused guys in your twenties. Not least because guys interested in such things are often doing so in *their* twenties.

FWIW, I saw very few female friends pair up with stable partners AND have kids after age 33 or so, even when the women really, really wanted to. For employed, healthy guys, though they seem to have little trouble finding takers on the matter well into their 40s. Guys hitting their 30s without kids often simply don't want kids, though. I suspect my anecdotal observations track the trends in sociological research, but I am too lazy to look into it.

Posted by: Spartee at November 24, 2010 12:17 PM

While I'm sure there are people who married young who don't regret their choice, I don't think that they are the majority. Yes, Thag, its nice when people grow together, but a woman in her early 20's who isn't sure what she wants is better off figuring that out instead of hoping her partner and her will eventually agree. I'd see someone stepping back and taking time out as a sign of maturity, not immaturity. Fools rush in, and that is what leads to those trapped feelings. Figuring out what you want doesn't have to be considered "New Agey." In fact, I consider it smart!

Posted by: Kristen at November 24, 2010 12:33 PM

I think that you have to weigh the risk of finding yourself trapped vs not having anything. Even if you do get trapped, it's probably better to be on the market again after a divorce than to have been on the market all along. Because like Lyssa described, the single life isn't healthy for most women. It's not necessarily good for men either, but it doesn't seem to have the same impact on us.

Someone's even written a song about it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-zUgiKPzt8

I didn't get married until I was 43, so I do have some experience w/ this issue. The only good thing to have come out of dating for that long is that I'm able to recognize how special my wife is. She's got grace and maturity, and never lost the sweetness that made me want to marry her. But I know that she would have been a wreck if she'd been through what a lot of other women experience. She's too sensitive that way.

Posted by: Maurice at November 24, 2010 12:33 PM

I'd see someone stepping back and taking time out as a sign of maturity, not immaturity.

I believe I said she should step back, just not to go and "have fun" via dating-as-amusement but in order to ascertain her own motives and desires. What's new age guff id the idea of "finding yourself"; it's vague and can mean whatever you what it to mean (just look at Eat Pray Barf for an example).

Also, it's better someone hears the truth at 23 than goes through life trying to "find herself" until where she finds herself is in an apartment full of cats.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 1:12 PM

>> For employed, healthy guys, though they seem to have little trouble finding takers on the matter well into their 40s.

That seems to be true. I've gotten more attention from young women in my late thirties than I did in my twenties. That's not something that I expected.

Posted by: Jack at November 24, 2010 1:37 PM

Jack wrote: "That seems to be true. I've gotten more attention from young women in my late thirties than I did in my twenties. That's not something that I expected."

I'll second (third?) that. I'm 39, and I've had women as young as 19 absolutely throw themselves at me. The youngest I've actually (briefly) dated was 23, who told me she wanted "a man, not a boy."

My female friends who are around my age don't seem to have a problem finding young men willing to sleep with them, but it's always purely sexual, and not really a dating relationship.

Posted by: MikeInRealLife at November 24, 2010 2:05 PM

"A man with any sense would rather have a 23-year-old woman who hasn't been, as Roissy would say, riding the alpha cock carousel for a decade (one hopes) than a woman with declining fertility who has likely been played a few times and has lost a certain ability to bond with a man."

30 isn't THAT old. Look at any movie or TV show about high school students-half the actors are in their late twenties and still passing for 16 year olds. I think that the majority of women get more attractive throughout their twenties as they figure out style and grooming and lose the baby fat.

I agree with you that devoting the entirety of your twenties to sleeping around and "finding yourself" is a waste of time (isn't that what college is for?), but the idea that most women are damaged goods after 30? Nah.

Posted by: Shannon at November 24, 2010 2:12 PM

Shannon, even so, given the choice between 23 and 33, what do you think most men will choose if he's family minded? And if 33 had done her share of sleeping around, she is more than likely to be damaged. I know it's not THAT old - I got carded at a bar when I was 30 and I still get looked at with slight suspicion on a good day when I'm buying wine (maybe they'd card me if I bought alcopops) - but market value for marriage is rapidly in decline post-30 for women.

Doesn't mean it'll never happen, just that your pool is shrinking and if you're only starting to look when you hit 30, soon you're 35 and your value is considerably lower than it was a few short years ago when you were still partying. Get to 40 and you're left with the dregs who can't get someone younger (because if they could, they would in most cases) or being a cougar for a while until menopause hits and you're done.

It's not just looks, but a few TV personalities are not indicative of what the average 35-year-old looks like. If you're one of the lucky ones, you can hold on to your looks a little longer than most; but most people my age look on the way out to me. Most people do not age that well. A lot of men aren't any better, but I've seen a lot more good looking men of 50 than women.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 24, 2010 2:31 PM

>> I think that the majority of women get more attractive throughout their twenties as they figure out style and grooming and lose the baby fat.

I agree w/ that. Many women hit their stride in their early thirties. Some of the sexiest women I know are that age.

Thag is onto something though. Women's features change as they get into their thirties. It's hormonal. They begin to produce more testosterone and less estrogen, and this affects their appearance. It's one reason that some women this age start to take on a more masculine appearance. For a lot of women this change is flattering, but for many it's not. In either case it signals your fertility, which is going to be a factor for men who want to have kids - just because we don't talk about these things, it doesn't mean that we're not aware of them.

Posted by: Jack at November 24, 2010 3:17 PM

Thag, the men friends I have that are family minded don't want to date women in their 20's. From what they tell me, they feel most younger women lack the self-confidence and maturity that they are seeking in a mate. And I should say they speak mostly of women under 25. Many of my male and female friends married in their 30's as well as met their spouses in their late 20's, early 30's. Most of the men I know are attracted to the young 20's physically but don't feel that emotionally the young girls are ready. It could also be that they are afraid of the young girls growing bored, but that would be an assumption on my part.

Posted by: Kristen at November 24, 2010 3:25 PM

@Kristen

That's what known as pandering.

Posted by: The Obvious at November 24, 2010 3:38 PM

I'm not sure I get what all the hang-up is about age. (I mean, I get what the LW is concerned about, but not all this "over 30" stuff. How many men does a woman need to meet in order to have a relationship? I think it's only one, right?

Evaluating one's worth on the market by attracting a ton of guys is a different matter altogether. That's not necessarily about finding a good relationship, it's about feeding your ego. "Oh, I'm attracting X amount of men at my age, so I must be special." But it's like a long married friend of mine said to me once, "you only have to meet one right guy to fall in love."

My mom was 69 when she I took her to a dating agency. Do you know what? I expected her to be in a big pool of other women with only a handful of men to choose from. So I was shocked when I was told that no, it's actually the other way around.

And the woman at the agency wasn't kidding. Within six weeks my mom was fixed up with 8 guys. (She chose the first one, but then decided to do a bit of shopping around.) He still calls her everyday at her nursing home, even though he lives a few hours away.

Things don't conform to this so-called conventional wisdom nearly as often as people think. Really.

My lowesst point for attracting a man happened from the ages of about 27 to 36. Then things started to pick up. I'm 50 now and I still get approached on a regular basis. And I'm no beauty queen, I just keep my weight down, act friendly, do stuff that gets me out of the house and around men, and that's about it.

I don't talk about how often I get hit on (unless it's with another friend who's having the same experience) because I'm pretty sure no one's going to believe me, or they'll think I'm exaggerating. But there's a huge pool of men out there in my age group right now. I know of three women at my workplace who got married in their 50s (two for the first time).

I mean, who's going around creating these so called parameters that say a woman over 30, 40 or 50 isn't worth as much as a woman in their 20s? I've said this before on this blog, so I don't want to get too repetitive, but look at the preoccupation our culture has with weight. The perception is that only skinny women meet men and get married. And that's crazy because wedding dresses in plus sizes sell just as well as wedding dresses in the smaller sizes. Ask anyone in that business.

It's a numbers game and that's it.

Posted by: ie at November 24, 2010 4:23 PM

Hung Jury, Amy knows what she is talking about. You've been looking for the right man for what, 5 years? She's been looking for nearly 30 years and still hasn't found the one man worthy of marrying her and becoming a father figure to her little dog. Once you are 46 yourself you will be much better prepared to begin a proper search for a husband.

Ok, more seriously. Amy is right for the wrong reason. If you aren't that into this guy (and I would say you clearly aren't), you really owe it to him to cut him loose while you play the field, figure out what you want, rumspringa, etc. I suspect you are afraid you will harm him by doing this, but it really will be the best thing which ever happened to him. Some women are ready to marry at a fairly young age, others aren't. Just because you aren't ready doesn't mean some wonderful woman won't be delighted to do so. So don't worry, while it will hurt him some in the short term, in time he will undoubtedly thank you.

Posted by: Dalrock at November 24, 2010 4:47 PM

IE my point, which seems to have set this whole thing off, was that I don't agree w/ the advice that women often get to fool around in their twenties, and then try to find a husband in their thirties. Because from what I've seen, it's just not a good strategy. But this only applies to women who want to get married and have kids. What you'd experienced in your late twenties to mid thirties is what I'm warning about. If you'd wanted those things, you'd have been at a disadvantage.

Posted by: Maurice at November 24, 2010 5:24 PM

The only thing that I'd like to point out is that while the LW is upset that her BF makes grand plans but doesn't keep them ( like every other 20 something ) , she's enrolled in a law program. So she shouldn't be throwing stones.

Law is a very bad career choice right now. The entire field is experiencing a huge glut of attorneys. It's estimated that only about 50% of grads will be able to make a career in law, and those who do may actually see their annual compensation decrease throughout their career. Unless she's independently wealthy and doing this on a lark, it's likely to be a bad career choice. I wonder whether the BF's expected marriage proposal will still stand when he realizes he's absorbing her worthless law school debt.

There's something that irks me about her letter, aside from the fact that she's cribbing from a romcom. Maybe its the off-handed way that she dismisses him, and their relationship. Or that she comes off as being a little full of herself. She reminds me of young women I've known who'll throw men away just because they can. It's like an exercise in power. As soon as they're confident that they have a man's commitment, they start to undermine him. Maybe it's for the drama, or to feel superior, but it's a common pattern.

Posted by: Germainium at November 24, 2010 6:19 PM

My views are not PC, but I think that women are most happy when they come into a man's life and "his adventure." A man that is willing to move to fit in a woman's life doesn't usually work out.

Something is lacking and such leads to a woman wondering and not feeling if he can protect her. The next thing that happens is her lack of respect for him, possible straying and unhappiness for both.

Any guy willing to give up his life for a woman is not worth having. Female feelings and response are contrary on this issue.

As to the beauty-age debate, it also depends on the entitlement mentality of a particular woman. A 33yo can be more desirable than a 23yo, if reasonably attractive. But in general the “commodity” value declines with age (not intending to be cruel or debasing). I have always valued women that are old enough to have "pulled their head out." Yet this prevalence also is correlated with increased "baggage."

Posted by: CSPB at November 24, 2010 6:21 PM

@Maurice, point-taken, but there was also a personal reason that contributed to that dry spell.

(I don't want to go into too much detail, but when I left a relationship at 27, the man became violent with me. It put me off dating and men for a few years.)

I do agree that there's a kind of desperation I've seen in women in their 30s. These are women who want to get married and have kids, but again, I think it's numbers and not that they're past their sell-by date, which is what some of the posters here seem to be saying. It's almost as if some people think that once a woman hits 30 she's got a stale vagina and an ugly face.

For women in that age group, the problem is just that a lot of their male peers are taken by that time and unless they're willing to go for an older man, (or sometimes a younger one), then they may have problems hooking up.

But I also think it's the desperation itself that's a problem. That manufactured pressure that makes women in that position panic. They're nowhere near as much fun to date as women who are more carefree, and that in and of itself is an issue.

One interesting thing I noted about my friends about that time is that some of them did unusual things as ego boosts, or pick-me-ups. For example, if you've ever been to Rome, or Italy in general, you know that Italian men are very open about pursuing women.

I had a couple of friends go there on holiday, come back feeling great about themselves and then immediately hook up with someone here. I went once--not for that reason--but I immediately understood why going there made them feel good. And I suggested it to a couple of friends who were feeling down about themselves.

A woman in her 30s who's looking to hook up often ends up being like a married woman who can't get pregnant. It's like they're "trying to hard" either to meet someone (or to get pregnant). Once they let go of focussed expectations, or a feeling of panic or failure, it (sometimes) happens all by itself.

I just think all this do or die stuff about what a woman should or shouldn't do in her 20s or 30s is a bit foolish and borders on fear-mongering. If a woman feels like reproducing in her 20s she probably will and if she doesn't she probably won't.

Posted by: ie at November 24, 2010 6:25 PM

@CSPB: the "added baggage" issue is the same for men, of course. Bitterness is unattractive in either gender, I find.

Posted by: ie at November 24, 2010 6:38 PM

I know plenty of women who've found someone in their mid thirties, and later. It's not as big of a problem as people are making out. What hinders some women though is that they slip into frumpiness. They don't give off any indication that they're still interested in being with a man. That's why they don't get any attention from men. It's not because of their age.

Posted by: lola at November 24, 2010 9:03 PM

Amy Alkon! Please give my daughter this same advice! It's perfect.

To the letter writer: Take it easy there, Turbo. You have a lot more living to do. There isn't any need to hitch your wagon to someone else's star to have a fulfilling life. Let them come to you.

You sound like a very intelligent young woman. Good luck to you.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 24, 2010 11:35 PM

I wouldn't give this advice to my daughters. Frankly, this young woman sounds like a bit of a ditz who needs a wake up call, not someone telling her what she wants to hear, which is that she should dump the nice guy and spend her 20s "finding herself" on the carousel and everything will be just fiiiiine. And to top it off, it's disturbingly couched in pseudo-spirituality borrowed from, of all people, the Amish - who one could argue are living the Bible in a way that is much more real than anyone else.

This is what irritated me about this advice, and the fact that non-thinking worldly fools want to chime in and stroke the LW's ego only confirms that I'm right to find this attitude toward relationships destructive and disturbing. It's bad enough, but don't go picking the "fun parts" out of an ancient tradition for the convenient justification of lousy morals.

I'm probably wasting my time, and she should probably do the guy a favour and dump him, but I just couldn't let this one past the radar somehow.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 5:21 AM

Sorry ie, but you couldn't be more wrong if you tired.

But I also think it's the desperation itself that's a problem. That manufactured pressure

More lies. It's biological. If anything, what's manufactured is this idea that women can "have it all" and that there's no real drop in fertility as we age, that evo-psych is fiction, that we don't have innate drives that make younger women generally more desirable than older ones.

ego boosts

That says it all right there. Kill your ego; it'll do you good.

Italian men are very open about pursuing women

They'll pursue older women on holiday because they are easy marks. Good heavens, are you all really this naive?

And I suggested it to a couple of friends who were feeling down about themselves.

EPL philosophy. This is a shallow quick fix that fixes nothing. With friends like these....

I just think all this do or die stuff about what a woman should or shouldn't do in her 20s or 30s is a bit foolish and borders on fear-mongering. If a woman feels like reproducing in her 20s she probably will and if she doesn't she probably won't.

It's not fear mongering, it's just the truth. Life isn't fair! Paths will close once not taken. You make ushering forth new life sound so trivial here, like it's a matter similar to "I feel like having roast beef for dinner tonight." I suppose I shouldn't be surprised given the current cultural disrespect for human life, but this whole post is shallow and cavalier.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 5:49 AM

P.S. It's running off your ego that makes you an easy mark for those Italian players. By all means if you enjoy being a free whore, go for it. But I fail to see how that makes you a better person or really helps you in any real way.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 5:52 AM

This could be written by the girl my son is seeing. She's here for an environmental internship, yet, she has a steady boyfriend from her hometown, who was her first, so she can't seem to find the courage to break up with him, even though she tells my son that he is much more exciting, and she's bored with the other guy.

Her mom and sister, visiting from out of town, are coming for Thanksgiving today, and they don't know she's been dating my son, so they're going to tell them that my son is her "gay friend".

I found all this out yesterday. My Thanksgiving is turning into something out of "The Bird Cage!" lol How we're going to pull this off is beyond me. I'll have 25 guests who all know my son is straight and has been seeing her.

It would be a lot easier if she'd just come clean, and the LW should too. If she's feeling wanderlust, she should break up with him. If she's doubting the love, and wouldn't move for him, it's pretty clear that the spark is just not there.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 5:56 AM

lovelysoul, wow, that sounds like one helluva thanksgiving. I have to ask though, why are adults going along with this? Enabling a girl to be flaky and string along two guys, lie at Thanksgiving dinner, and generally play everyone because she doesn't have the spine to make a decision? This sounds nuts!

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 6:04 AM

"I have to ask though, why are adults going along with this?"

That's a good question. Furthermore, why is your son going along with this? At the very least, it's terribly inconsiderate to you, lovelysoul.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 6:23 AM

jonQpublic, her son is going along with it because his mom lets him. People will treat you as you allow them and teach them to. I would also worry about the level of self-respect I'd be imparting to my son by approving this behaviour from his part-time squeeze, although for all I know he is playing her as much as she's playing him. It's funny how much trouble we go to as parents to teach kids not to tell lies, then we'll do something like this so as not to rock the boat!

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 6:32 AM

Agreed, Thag. And the son is teaching his kinda-sorta girlfriend to treat him and his entire family like a bunch of schmucks. Sounds like she's learning her lesson pretty well.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 6:44 AM

I'm betting that lovelysoul's son is going along with it because he gets pussy in return.

I'm willing to be lovelysoul is agreeing to go along with it because she finds it amusingly stupid, and she knows that none ofher other guests are involved and it will probably wind up coming out with out her having to make any fuss whatsoever.

Posted by: lujlp at November 25, 2010 6:50 AM

Well, I was mostly being funny, guys. That's what the two of them came up with. I personally am not going to lie to her mother and sister. I doubt they'll ask me if my son is gay. If she wants to lie to her family (and her boyfriend), I can't stop her. And I don't really see it as my place to tell her family that she's cheating on her boyfriend. That'll make for pleasant Thanksgiving conversation! lol

I did ask my son, "What happens if you two get serious?" and he replied, "Mom, I'm not going to get serious about this girl. She's already cheating on ONE boyfriend!" He's a smart boy. She's really hot ("smokin' hot" he calls her), so he's just having fun. C'mon, he's 20.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 6:54 AM

lovelysoul, Ah, in that case, carry on....

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 7:02 AM

Exactly, Luj. Somebody is going to spill it tonight anyway. I'll have 25 people, most of whom will be drinking, so I doubt they'll be able to pull off a ruse. Everybody here calls her his "girlfriend" to say, "Oh, hello, you're his girlfriend's mom..." Should be interesting :)

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 7:03 AM

"I'll second (third?) that. I'm 39, and I've had women as young as 19 absolutely throw themselves at me." -- Mikeinreallife

Well, I'm 40 and couldn't get laid in a women's prison with a fistful of pardons. :)

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 7:07 AM

LS you do realize that by degrading himself in that way, your son is destroying any chance he has of being with this girl. She may not realize what she's setting him up for, but I can almost guarantee that that will be the outcome.

Posted by: Jack at November 25, 2010 7:13 AM

@lovelysoul -- You're son does sound like a smart boy. I'm mostly surprised that he invited this girl at all. He should learn the phrase, "not a dinner thang."

I hope my other posts didn't come off as an attack. Could you please check back into this thread after your holiday and let us all know how it went? It sounds like you're about to collect a good story.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 7:15 AM

@Jack:

It sounds like that's already been covered.

"I did ask my son, "What happens if you two get serious?" and he replied, "Mom, I'm not going to get serious about this girl. She's already cheating on ONE boyfriend!" He's a smart boy. She's really hot ("smokin' hot" he calls her), so he's just having fun. C'mon, he's 20."

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 7:19 AM

re: Italian Players

I don't think that women would be so flattered if they knew why those men were pursuing them so earnestly. The Italians are notorious for this behavior, so are Greek men. Both of these cultures have the strange notion that it's OK to cheat on your wife with a whore. It's more forgivable than having a girlfriend, because the whore is of much lower station than the wife and so she is not a threat to the family. This is also why they go for older women. You'll see such men all over the tourist areas. It's very sleazy.

The topic of how people advise women, regarding their fertility and plans for family life, is interesting to me. I think that we are experiencing a form of social hysteria. The sentimentality with which these issues are addressed is telling. The advice and reassurances are offered as a palliative to women, but they are actually a poison. So why does this mythology persist? I don't know of any other culture in history that has developed a mythology for the purpose of sterilizing its women.

Posted by: Martin at November 25, 2010 7:48 AM

Exactly Martin, as I said, advising someone to "boost their self-esteem/ego" and "feel better about themselves" by giving themselves up to be a free whore for swarthy Europeans for a few weeks is beyond the pale. I'd go so far as to say it's evil, if unwittingly so.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:02 AM

Well, I'm not taking the bait, Thag or Martin. The attention I'm talking about, at least where me and my friends are concerned, was all innocent. I could have slept around when I travelled through the mediterranean, but didn't. And it wasn't for moral reasons, exactly. I was wary of getting STDs.

And the whole concept of "whore" is one I retired when I was around 14.

Thag, I find you entertaining, but let's face it, you do come here and post with the intention of provoking women. If you add up your posts and look at how you characterize women generally, it's a pretty dismal picture. And dismal pictures like that are usually a reflection of what's going on in the poster's (or speaker's) mind and that's about it. It's limited perspective with no bearing on most other women's realities.

I've known a few women like you in my lifetime. For some reason, they hate other women and hate them with a passion. All the information they pass off is in the guise of "this is reality girls, get used to it." It's tough love without the brains and I just don't get it.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 8:15 AM

"Exactly Martin, as I said, advising someone to "boost their self-esteem/ego" and "feel better about themselves" by giving themselves up to be a free whore for swarthy Europeans for a few weeks is beyond the pale. I'd go so far as to say it's evil, if unwittingly so."

Really? Guys can sleep with as many women as they want before marriage, but a woman can't? She's a whore?

Personally, I bring a lot more to the bedroom for my lucky fiance because I'm not a virgin and have learned a few tricks along the way, which he fully appreciates. Notwithstanding religious reasons, I think it's a very insecure man who wants a woman who is inexperienced or thinks in those terms.

Early 20s is too early for most people to settle down with one partner forever. Sure, it works sometimes, but you more often see these "starter marriages" fail because one or the other (or both) feel like they missed out on having experiences with other people.

It takes awhile for a woman to find the right "fit" sexually. Too often, young girls don't even think about that when they choose a partner. It's what kind of job he has, status, etc.

LW is probably dating this guy because he's going to be a lawyer - he has the right credentials to impress her friends and family. It "looks" like a perfect match, but if he doesn't rock her boat, she'll end up bored out of her mind in the suburbs someday. Then, she'll get divorced.

She should avoid all that. Stay single, date, until she finds a man who really lights her up...whatever age that is (believe me, it can still be found in the 30s and beyond!). It doesn't sound like this guy is doing it for her, or she wouldn't be writing for advice regarding her ambivalence.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 8:32 AM

Ah, the old "I know everything in your heart from a few comments on the Internet" argument and an ad hominem thrown in for good measure. Not really worth dignifying with a response but I'll just say that if by provoke you mean "start a flame war," you are mistaken. Nothing wrong with attempting to provoke thought though, even if it mostly falls on deaf ears.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:32 AM

Just because you figured something out when you were 14 doesn't mean you were right. Going off what you thought when you were 14 isn't really a sign of maturity now is it. It's funny how many people stop thinking after a point.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:35 AM

LS, there is a difference because for men, it takes a little work in most cases (a lot in some) to get laid. For women, it's easy if all they want is sex. A man who gets laid a bunch had to work for it to some extent, a woman simply provided no resistance or self-control - it wasn't work. It's not a double standard and it's why terms like "whore" and "slut" carry such emotional baggage and without massive desensitization, always will.

It doesn't mean every woman who isn't a virgin won't find a man, but I'd bet most men would rather have the woman with the single digit number than the one who has screwed 67 men.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:40 AM

Yes, Thag. Calling me an evil whore has really got me thinking...thinking you're probably a 17 year old boy who's having a great time here.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 8:45 AM

As for the "I learned some tricks" (funny choice of word in the context) argument, you could just as easily have learned that stuff if you'd been a virgin on your wedding day. I recall my first sexual partner and it didn't take all that long for us to learn (he'd only had 2 before me although he lied and said it was 10). Sexual intercourse is not rocket science. I'm sure if I was still with first dude, we'd be just as good in bed together as we are with other people now. It's kind of a nonsense argument, IMO.

/ too many posts in a row

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:47 AM

I didn't call you an evil whore, ie, I called your advice evil and acknowledged that it wasn't intended that way. But that's what evil is like. I've given out my share of horrible advice too. I'm not trying to create a spectacle here; it's just something I (obviously) feel strongly about and think a lot of people have been give a lot of crappy advice and we keep repeating lies until they become accepted as truth. I've repeated them myself, so I'm not trying to make this into a personal attack.

I'm sorry if you feel attacked, that wasn't really my intention either, but your rather juvenile response in attempting to invalidate my argument by hurling silly accusations at me tells me that I've hit a nerve.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:53 AM

Oh well, time for a musical break.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAH7MuIhXT0

Have fun folks; the Internet = serious business.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 8:57 AM

"It doesn't mean every woman who isn't a virgin won't find a man, but I'd bet most men would rather have the woman with the single digit number than the one who has screwed 67 men."

That's not necessarily true, and besides, the real gentlemen I know would never even ask for a number, nor would they particularly want to teach some inexperienced woman how to f--k. I've heard complaints about this from male friends.

"Sexual intercourse is not rocket science. I'm sure if I was still with first dude, we'd be just as good in bed together as we are with other people now. It's kind of a nonsense argument, IMO"

Maybe you just lucked out, or are amazingly orgasmic, but many women aren't so fortunate. I've known women stuck in marriages where the guy wouldn't go down on them, or simply didn't do it well. Not every guy is willing to learn what pleases his woman, and every woman is different, so what worked with a past girlfriend may not work with the current one. It takes communication, and I suspect a guy who gets hung up on a number is probably too insecure about his prowess in bed to handle that kind of conversation.

I'm having the best sex ever, and I'm in my 40s. My fiance doesn't know my number, and I don't know his, but whoever taught him some of his moves, I'm really grateful to. He's the hottest guy I've ever been with - just amazing to look at coming out of the shower (or going in) - which really helps too.

I'm with ie. I don't know where you developed these weird, outdated, sexist views, but you're wrong, and it's particularly odd since you're a woman.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 9:09 AM

I'm sorry but I'm now reading the comments for the laughs!! First, Lovelysoul, have a wonderful Thanksgiving!! It sounds like it will be a lot of fun and judging from other comments and topics, I have no doubt that you are a good mom who raised a smart boy!!

ie, whore is just a name people use when they don't have the emotional capacity to understand that everything in life is not black and white. We all can all be minimized down to being called a whore, but what problem does that ever solve. I'm sorry you suffered abuse and think stepping back and not dating was smart. Always take the time to know what you want.

Now seriously, Lovelysoul, I do have to know how hysterical your Thanksgiving dinner turns out.

Posted by: Kristen at November 25, 2010 9:18 AM

LS -- "... so what worked with a past girlfriend may not work with the current one."

Exactly. That's why Thag makes a very good point. It takes a long time for a man to figure out what works for a particular woman. Might as well begin the studies early.

You also have a good point that you would need to find a partner who is willing to want to please you. But once you ensure that you have that kind of a match, it's on.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 9:22 AM

The absolute worst advice is to tell young women that they should hurry up and find a partner because their "marketability" will go down. People who make choices out of fear or desperation rarely make good ones.

Given our life expectancies, marriage to the wrong person is a long sentence. I don't think anyone, male or female, should ever get married to someone who they don't feel passionate about. If you find yourself thinking, "I don't know if I would even move to be with him"...then "ding!"...that's the wrong person.

And maybe you never find the right person, but it's far better to build a fulfilling life alone than be trapped in a miserable marriage.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 9:22 AM

Yeah, thanks, Thag. I'll let you guys know how it goes. Cooking turkey as we speak. Hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving!

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 9:25 AM

Thag - I think that ie is making a different point about Italian men. None of these women are taking it seriously - it's understood to be a bit of light flirtation. Americans are so serious - Europeans just *enjoy* a bit of flirtiness that means absolutely nothing.

When you're feeling a bit dowdy or a bit down on yourself it's a boost to feel attractive. What ie's getting at is that flirting with an Italian man, who is hilariously extravagant in his admiration, gets you back in your groove. You begin to blossom again, start to hone your rusty skills and look in the mirror differently. All this in an environment where everyone knows it's just a bit of fun flirtiness.

You come home with a whole new attitude and it shows.

Posted by: AntoniaB at November 25, 2010 9:37 AM

Ladies I am not calling you whores. Please reread my comments, they have been misinterpreted.

Posted by: Martin at November 25, 2010 9:57 AM

gets you back in your groove

Kind of like this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120703/

Except IRL, she dumped her family and married the guy, only to find he was a homosexual who wanted a Visa. You go grrrl!

In your groove, also known as in a rut.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 9:58 AM

By all means - date around. Then you can be like all the other little sluts in their 20s who've ridden dozens of cocks and then end up in your 30s, bitter, drunk and angry at the world because no guy will want you.

Posted by: DJ at November 25, 2010 11:09 AM

@Kristen. I didn't stop dating during that time. I just became more cautious. And, I kept running into men who seemed to think I wanted a serious commitment right out of the starting gate. It was weird, but I guess fits in with what we're talking about here--how certain genders are affected by where they are age-wise. They make assumptions and things go pear-shaped, right?

I'm not offended by the word "whore." As a matter of fact, I find it funny. But what isn't funny is pungent bitterness and anger. Not fun. Not funny. I stay away from people like that in my real life for a reason: they tend to bring the level of civility down.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 11:11 AM

It's not exactly wise urging people to marry before they've gotten themselves together -- and not just emotionally. It's a terribly tough economy, and jobs are scarce, and people are sleeping on the floor of somebody's 8 x 10 room while looking for waitress jobs. Also, kids grow up much later than they ever did. I think American adolescence ends at 30 a lot of the time. What happens when people marry before they've fully formed who they are? They often marry somebody who's wrong for them, and if they have kids, they get hurt in the wake of this, in a subsequent divorce. I give advice for the real world, not the world of how things "should" be. There's no such thing as a "should," only what is and what isn't, as a wise old friend of mine used to tell me.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 25, 2010 11:38 AM

Who's urging her to marry? I didn't see anyone doing that. In the real world, you limit your options later by flitting around "having fun" in your 20s.

American adolescence ends at 30 a lot of the time

So we should just keep going down that pathetic road? It doesn't have to be that way.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 11:54 AM

What's your plan, standing in front of somebody and yelling, "Grow up!"

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 25, 2010 12:13 PM

By all means - date around. Then you can be like all the other little sluts in their 20s who've ridden dozens of cocks and then end up in your 30s, bitter, drunk and angry at the world because no guy will want you.

I was "a little slut" in my 20s, after I figured out that I wasn't ready for a relationship. Then, in my 30s, I started looking for a boyfriend, and found one. I wasn't bitter, drunk, or angry at the world, and that doesn't (and didn't) describe my friends or other women in their 30s that I know and knew. Your comment, however, is redolent of a whole lot of bitterness and anger on your part. About the drunk part, however, I have no idea.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 25, 2010 12:19 PM

Yesterday, I was in talking to a group of students for something related to my work. Anyway, in the course of the talk, I brought up the fact that the idea of marriage, for young people of their age (17-19), was very different in the 70s. Those were my young teenage years.

I told them that from the time I was 17 to 25, I attended tons of weddings, and all the weddings were of friends my own age. I said that I remember feeling that there was pressure on for girls my age to get engagement rings, build up dowries ("hope chests") and finally tie the knot.

Now I come from a small town in central Canada that had a manufacturing base. Out of my high school class, I'd say maybe 10% of us got to university. But still...that's what I grew up seeing and it's a path I obviously I rejected.

Anyway, the looks on these students' faces said it all. The ones who actually believed me (I could tell about half of them thought I was exaggerating) looked pretty horrified. I told the skeptics to "go ask your parents or grandparents and just see if I'm not right." It was really funny.

If a young woman in her 20s wants to get married and have children, the more power to her for knowing her mind. But if she wants to get her education first, well, it's all to the good as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 12:48 PM

Let's put aside the defensiveness and try to look at this issue pragmatically, from a man's perspective.

If a man wants a family, he probably shouldn't marry a woman over 35, due to health and fertility concerns.

But few men are going to want to marry and impregnate a woman the day after he meets her. So she'll need to be a little younger than 35, to accommodate the courtship and provide some time together before the child comes.

How long should this be? I've often heard women say that it should be two years. One for dating, and one for the 'honeymoon period'. This is unrealistic. A more appropriate number is four years or more, split between some combination of courting and married years.

Because despite what women think, men actually do have a pretty good idea of what it's like to be married with children. At least men over thirty do. The idea of rushing into this sort of commitment, and turning your whole life upside down, after only a year of knowing someone is not going to be appealing for most men.

So now we're at 31 or younger. Low and behold, that's about the age after which women start noticing a change in how men their age regard them. Because they're witnessing the results of how men think about these things. It's that simple.

Posted by: Mike at November 25, 2010 1:25 PM

"By all means - date around. Then you can be like all the other little sluts in their 20s who've ridden dozens of cocks and then end up in your 30s, bitter, drunk and angry at the world because no guy will want you."

There's a huge middle ground between sleeping around for a decade and settling for the first guy you date before your market value runs out? "Dating around" can mean just that-DATING-or having more than one serious relationship before you make a lifetime commitment and merge finances and make babies with someone.

Posted by: Shannon at November 25, 2010 1:32 PM

What's your plan, standing in front of somebody and yelling, "Grow up!"

I can see you've given what I've said here some real thought. Is this really the best you've got for a rebuttal? I said right at the beginning of this thread that she should probably take a step back and examine her motives, because farting around having a good time is not the way to mature and prepare for marriage, if that's what she wants.

If she finds after a period of serious reflection that she'd rather have the thrill of alpha cock, she can go and do that, but she can't do that and expect to get off the carousel when she's in her 30s and be considered marriage material. So in essence, yes, she needs to grow up if she wants a good marriage. Is there something wrong with advising someone to grow up now, because we expect "adolescence" to last until 30?

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 1:39 PM

Mike, in a perfect world things might go the way you say, but I can't think of one man I know who's gone about it the way you've laid out.

I have had plenty of friends get impregnated very quickly in relationships and despite all the negative predictions, a lot of those relationships--which started when the woman was in her late 30s or yes, even her early 40s--are still going. There's a maturity there that allows for this.

The relationships I described in my last post--about all those young married's on their starter marriages--aren't going concerns anymore. These people have all split up. I know because I spent six months in my hometown when my mother first became ill.

The reality is more women want more time. And science is giving it to them. It's extending fertility and that's happening because there's a demand for it. Kinda like there's a big demand for that little blue pill!

And, I should mention here too, that fertility problems, contrary to what most people think, aren't only something older women experience. I've known a few women who started trying in their late 20s only to adopt or go the IVF route a few years later when it wasn't happening. The doctors they saw said they were too young for fertility treatments and should keep trying the natural way.

Yes, there's a biological time clock, but I'm pretty sure that if I read your post out to my male friends, it would give them all a good laugh. Most of them (who are in families) came by their wives and kids in far less scientifically planned and clinical ways.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 2:15 PM

IE you should go to Vegas, because you are a magnet for statistical outliers.

The reality is more women want more time. And science is giving it to them.

But men don't want those women! That's where this argument goes off the rails. It's a bunch of women arguing with each other about something that relies on men, but there's no consideration for what men want.

The proposition of getting together with a middle aged woman so that she can undergo fertility treatments is bizarre. You'd have to be totally off the reservation to assume that this is an attractive idea. It's one thing for married couples, or people who've been together for a long while and want kids, but it's not something that any man I know is going to sign up for out of the gate. Except maybe for gay men who want kids, they might be into that arrangement.

Also I don't have a clinical approach to women, I was describing why things work out the way they tend to. To be totally honest, the biggest factor is really sexual attraction. Most women aren't sexually attractive past their early thirties. They might be nice looking, but they lose the sexual dimension of their attractiveness. If they can't get a man to sleep with them, he's probably not going to marry them and join in the fertility treatments.

Posted by: Mike at November 25, 2010 3:16 PM

Mike the older women I mentioned got knocked up the old fashioned way, which means they actually found men who found them attractive. So so much for your wondrous theory about age and sexual attraction.

The ones going for fertility treatment have been married for a few years already. In Canada they have to be to qualify for IVF.

You sound too young to have such out-dated ideas, if you don't mind me saying.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 4:08 PM

But men don't want those women! That's where this argument goes off the rails. It's a bunch of women arguing with each other about something that relies on men, but there's no consideration for what men want.

Mike, thanks for the laugh! I needed that!
I'm 46. My husband is 26. Yes, you read that right, 20 years difference in the opposite direction than you usually see. I have a daughter that is 1 year older than my hubby. We are best friends, teammates, in love to a dizzying degree even after 5 years. My first hubby was 14 years older than me and an immature mama's boy, go fig.

Some people are mature at age 10, some never reach maturity tho they live to 100. It all boils down to what an individual experiences, so going out and making mistakes, learning from them, and lather/rinse/repeating that is a good thing. It's when you replace the "learning" with "bounces off the skull and into the ether" that things get messy.

Posted by: Kat at November 25, 2010 4:50 PM

@JonQpublic
Well, I'm 40 and couldn't get laid in a women's prison with a fistful of pardons. :)

You just need to learn the difference between what women tell you attracts them, and what actually does. The best source here is pickup artists, in the same way that if you wanted to learn how to break into a building you would consult a thief. I have a list of "Game for marriage resources" on my blog, but your best bet if you are looking to seduce a woman who you aren't already involved with is probably to check out Citizen Renegade.

Not all of it is gold, and most of it is crass. But if you can sift through the bad parts there is a great deal of truth lurking there.

Just keep in mind that what you think you know isn't working, and approach it with an open mind.

Posted by: Dalrock at November 25, 2010 5:00 PM

I think that you both know what I'm saying.

Congrats on your odd ball lifestyles, but for the other 95% of women, who aren't into 15 year olds and don't want to play roulette w/ their fertility, earlier is obviously better.

Posted by: Mike at November 25, 2010 5:19 PM

"But men don't want those women! That's where this argument goes off the rails. It's a bunch of women arguing with each other about something that relies on men, but there's no consideration for what men want."

No, men like you don't want those women...but those women don't want you either, so it all works out.

You're discounting a whole lot of men who've already done the fertility thing (and have the child support and alimoney payments to show for it). These men find confident, self-supporting women who love them for who they are very sexy.

A woman who marries you because she wants to procreate - or because you want to procreate with her - is not a good choice. That woman will leave for greener pastures as soon as she has the kids.

Smart men understand that a good relationship has nothing to do with a woman's age or fertility, but whether she has the capacity to truly love him, through the ups and downs, until the very end. That capacity for deep and enduring love tends to coincide with maturity.

A smart man, who doesn't want to be divorced and saddled with child support, by his 40s, will choose a mature woman in her 30s over an inexperienced 20-something who doesn't know herself or what/who she wants.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 6:12 PM

lovelysoul is quite right.

These men find confident, self-supporting women who love them for who they are very sexy.

Works for my man. I don't want or need to get married, don't want to live together, and Gregg knows I'm only with him because he's Gregg. We'll have been together for eight years in a few weeks. I never thought I'd find anyone interesting for that long, but I can't imagine being without him.

"That capacity for deep and enduring love tends to coincide with maturity."

I see this over and over with my friends. Some of what I perceive to be the best, most loving relationships are those of people who got together in their 30s. I met Gregg when I was 38, after spending eight years pretty much alone because I just wasn't finding anyone who was what I wanted (ethical was a big part of it).

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 25, 2010 6:37 PM

I agree, LS, it does usually work out that people who really want each other find each other. The ones who are yearning for the unobtainable are unrealistic to the point where they hurt their chances of meeting someone they're compatible with.

Things are changing with issues around child-rearing as well. I have a good friend, a few years younger than me, whose wife left him and left him to raise his kids. He's totally into his kids, his wife isn't. She still sees them on weekends, but they primarily live with him. She's also paying him child support.

It's the same with a woman friend of mine. Her husband has the kids too, and she's the one who takes them on weekends and trips and such. But their primary residence is with their father.

I think it's interesting that neither of these women fought for sole custody and that they were willing to let their husbands take over. The biological imperative seems to be stronger in the men in these two situations.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 6:46 PM

"These men find confident, self-supporting women who love them for who they are very sexy."

No man anywhere ever nudged his buddy and told him, "Check out the confidence and self-sufficiency on *that* chick! Yum..."

"A smart man..."

Here we go: you are a "man" (in this case smart one) if you follow the rules a female sets down.

No thanks.

Posted by: Spartee at November 25, 2010 6:50 PM

BTW, am I the only one here who find's lovelysoul's son's behavior appalling?

I think Plato commented that the punishment the unethical face is, eventually, they can only consort with their own, as people of better virtues identify and avoid them.

Oh, I know, "he's only twenty!" Twenty is a grown man, or at least should be.

Posted by: Spartee at November 25, 2010 7:00 PM

Is this what Venus is like?

Posted by: Mike at November 25, 2010 7:05 PM

"Congrats on your odd ball lifestyles, but for the other 95% of women, who aren't into 15 year olds and don't want to play roulette w/ their fertility, earlier is obviously better."

Mike, I had a great-aunt who lived in Austria. She was the head-housekeeper for some branch of some royal family over there. After the second world war there was a serious shortage of men; my mom came to Canada at that time and married here at the ripe old age of 26 (which was old at the time).

My great-aunt, however, stayed in Europe and at 40, married a man 17 years her junior. My mom likes telling the story because it's our family "scandal", but in a good way.

The thing is, my great-aunt took care of herself; because she worked for a royal family, she didn't go without (good food or nice clothes) throughout the war and kept her figure. Even with a shortage of men, she managed to attract one that much younger. This is a man who would have had his choice of many, many women.

I met her when she was 85 and she was still beautiful. (Good bone structure never goes away.) She died at 86 and she and her husband had a long and happy marriage.

Posted by: ie at November 25, 2010 7:08 PM

@lovelysoul -- You are absolutely right that there are a lot of men out there who have already done the fertility thing and find older, confident women very, very sexy. I count myself among them and would not date a woman in her twenties if my life depended on it.

However, that's not Mike's point. He's talking about women that have a mind toward starting a family and he's correct that, if that's the goal, you're going to need to get started earlier.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 7:16 PM

Hey Lovelysoul,

How did your Thanksgiving celebrations go over?

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 7:18 PM

Spartee, thanks for saying that about the boy. I figured I'd just ignore that one; done enough hole poking for one thread that has yet to really be answered with much more than women's magazine quality ponderings and anecdotes about outliers. I don't know how many times I said "generally" but hey, whatever.

No man anywhere ever nudged his buddy and told him, "Check out the confidence and self-sufficiency on *that* chick! Yum..."

Bwah ha ha ha ha!!! And one I like for when people start trotting out that you can't measure sexual attractiveness: You never hear a man say, "y'know, I just don't think Marilyn Monroe was all that hot." Not as hot as a confident, self-sufficient gal in her mid- to late-30s, that's for sure! Phew!

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 7:22 PM

Ah, but me and my "outdated" views. Is there some almanac of what is and isn't considered sexually desirable that comes out every year that I've been missing? There's a lot about humans that haven't changed on a basic biological level; you can only circumvent it so far.

Is it just me, or does the "outdated" argument sound, again, like a teenager calling his parents "old"? Adults still trying to be "cool" is a sad sight indeed.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 25, 2010 7:30 PM

"No man anywhere ever nudged his buddy and told him, "Check out the confidence and self-sufficiency on *that* chick! Yum..."

Yeah, but the women you nudge your buddies over and the women you can actually get are two different things. That's not the standard of the women most men choose to be in a relationship with....or who would choose them. Most guys would nudge each other over Pamela Anderson, but a) they couldn't get her, and b) they wouldn't actually want her (judging by your whore definition).

Unfortunately, my Thanksgiving was less amusing than I'd predicted. Mom and sis came, and they were both very nice. Nobody questioned my son's sexuality. I'm not sure if they lied to her family or not, but I think mom was impressed by my art collection, and she really liked my son, so maybe if the relationship continues she won't be too upset.

I don't want my son to get serious about anyone at this age, but I do see potential for them as a couple. She likes all the things he does - diving, sailing, and camping in the Everglades. It's hard to find a smokin' hot girl who doesn't mind roughing it next to gators and snakes, so I think she'll be a hard act to follow.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 25, 2010 8:00 PM

Hi Lovelysoul,

Thanks for getting back with the update. I'm selfishly disappointed that there wasn't a blow out :)

Back to the action: "Yeah, but the women you nudge your buddies over and the women you can actually get are two different things"

Really? Are you really banking on being 'low hanging fruit' in order to fulfill the romance piece of your life?

Also, "It's hard to find a smokin' hot girl who doesn't mind roughing it next to gators and snakes, so I think she'll be a hard act to follow."

Probably not. I'll bet she's only pretending to like all that shit. As soon as your son is strapped to her like a colostomy bag, she'll lose interest in that stuff pretty quickly.

What? She's too honest to pull such a stunt?

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 9:56 PM

@lovelysoul, et al-- By the way, in spite of my comment above, I'm glad that you pulled off a nice Thanksgiving meal and wish you well. That goes for everyone here. Happy Thanksgiving everyone! We all have a lot to be thankful for.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 25, 2010 10:06 PM

Adults still trying to be "cool" is a sad sight indeed.

Some don't have to try. Gregg is cool. Little Shiva, who we're seeing today, is cool. And a lot of my writer friends who have hit 60 are cool. It's hard to remember they're old.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 26, 2010 12:42 AM

"Probably not. I'll bet she's only pretending to like all that shit. As soon as your son is strapped to her like a colostomy bag, she'll lose interest in that stuff pretty quickly."

No, she's a biologist, actually. She's 22 and graduated from the Univ of MI in May. She told me last nt that she's looking for a job here. Obviously, if she stays, she'll probably break up with the other guy since he's still in MI (I assume).

We rented a trailer on our property to this environmental group to house their interns. All of them, so far, have been females, around my son's age, who love the environment, so it's a fortuitious situation for him.

They only stay a few months at a time, which is why I'm sure she didn't break it off with her bf, as she thought she'd be going back.

She also told my son that her family still thinks she's a virgin, so that was another reason she didn't want them to suspect anything was going on.

I don't understand how any parent can believe their 22 yr old smokin' hot biologist daughter is still a virgin...but whatever.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 26, 2010 4:34 AM

The age thing does seem to be an issue for some cultures. The thing is in French countries, provinces, etc., women have got that all figured out. I'm always amazed at how great older women look here in this city. And it's not because they're shopping in the teen section of some department store, it's because there are some smart designers (and retailers) in this city who know how to make clothes that look great on anyone.

I don't get what's with the anti-ageing thing and women. On another thread I talked about how my friend and I were doing online dating and a full third of the men who contacted us were younger, most in their early 30s.

And they were professionals, not cabana boys looking for a free ride. Quite frankly, my friend and I were quite puzzled by it. She did ask some of them--she met with them, I didn't--and they just said things along the lines of liking the stability and lack of drama that came with older women. So all this hogwash about age and women losing their value just isn't lining up straight with my reality.

I also said I didn't want to be with older men, but that was because a lot of the ones who were consciously looking for younger women were doing it--well, at least in my opinion--to make themselves feel younger. You know, they were throwing the responsibility for how they felt at the woman, instead of being lively and interesting people in their own right. When you've got a spark, it doesn't matter, quite often, what your age is.

I did date someone 17 years my senior and it was a nice relationship. But it started out because we were both active in a political cause and the relationship formed naturally, not because he was an older guy lying on an online dating site, saying he was 10 years younger and hoping to get away with it. That's the major difference. People who accept their age are indeed way more sexy than people who lie about it.

Anyway, I think some of the posters here are just stuck way back in another century...

Posted by: ie at November 26, 2010 4:46 AM

"Anyway, I think some of the posters here are just stuck way back in another century..."

Agreed, ie. This whole "marketability" thing, which comes up thread after thread, is absurd.
Everybody is marketable to somebody! As long as one realistically assesses their target market, they can always find a partner. Clearly, people are still finding love and getting married at all ages.

A 22 yr old woman is, of course, more marketable to men who wants kids. But men who already have kids aren't so interested in seriously dating a 20-something because she'll likely want kids at some point, and unless he's wealthy enough to support a bunch of kids, there are financial and lifestyle considerations.

People weigh a lot of factors in choosing who to date, and age is just one. So is fertility - both pro and con.

I seriously dated a man who was 12 yrs younger. The age difference didn't bother him at all. He already had a child from a previous relationship with a young woman who "accidentally" got pregnant. She also had a drug problem, so he was raising the child alone.

Guys who've already been down that road often appreciate the stability and maturity an older woman brings to the table.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 26, 2010 5:38 AM

I'll also add that with the internet, marketing oneself to potential partners has become easier than ever.

Maybe, in the old days, when women were limited to just their small town and a handful of bachelors, there could be concern about aging out of the "market", but now, any woman can go online, and if she's reasonably fit and attractive, she'll have men pursuing her in minutes.

Like ie, I turned away so many younger guys. They are definitely out there pursuing older women. However, I preferred a man my own age, and that's exactly what I found.

He doesn't have kids. Never wanted them. Fertility was only an issue for him as far as being afraid of it, so he had a vasectomy last year. Now, we don't have to worry about that anymore.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 26, 2010 5:48 AM

It's funny that this turned into yet another thread on whether middle aged women are still attractive. Any time the subject of when to marry comes up online, a bunch of older women jump on it and start with the same stories.

Lovelysoul & IE I'm sure you're both desirable women. But I bet that you also realize that not all women your age are in the same boat. Lovelysoul you live in the everglades for god sake, and IE you're dating men in their early thirties. Neither of you are good examples of what it's like for most women.

I live in NYC, which has more than it's share of attractive women in their thirties and forties. It's hard for my single female friends to meet quality men. It just is.

Posted by: Maurice at November 26, 2010 8:09 AM

The women you nudge your buddies over, and the women you want to bring home to mom, are not always one and the same.

Or the men.

Posted by: NicoleK at November 26, 2010 8:55 AM

I agree that you should look nice, but, (and keep in mind this is an anecdote) in my experience my hottest friends aren't necessarily the ones in great marriages or other relationships. Or any relationship.

Posted by: NicoleK at November 26, 2010 8:58 AM

It's limited perspective with no bearing on most other women's realities.

This is another false invalidation I always find amusing. Attempting to invalidate an argument by appealing to the idea that the arguer is "limited" by personal experience, yet, on the other had arguing from your own personal experience that I suppose you think is somehow unlimited and more universal. It's a bit like calling black conservatives "Uncle Tom" in that it's an attempt to discredit by bigoted assumptions. I'm not talking about "most women's realities," whatever that means, I'm talking about the reality of the world. Most women's "realities" consist of fooling themselves and rationalization hamsters. You think you're being clever here, but what you're saying could equally apply to yourself.

Most women past 35 are more or less past it - look around you and see for yourself! I'm not even talking about myself in a way, because I still get a decent bit of male attention from pretty much all age groups and I could probably snag myself someone if I really wanted to, I just don't see the point at this stage in my life - i.e. it's more work than it's worth when I have so much else to do and I don't feel I have a lot to offer because my time is mostly taken up with other things. It would have to be someone who doesn't want a lot of my time, because I just don't have much of it to give.

So yes, I realize women can be attractive past 35, I just think the reality for most women is not going to be that great unless they're natural loners like me.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 26, 2010 11:02 AM

@Maurice: big cities are harder on single women. The stats are that single women in bigger cities tend to outnumber the men. I spent a few months in London, England, a few years ago and at the time, it was estimated that there were 4 single women for each single male. Well, I don't know how accurate that is, but it sure seemed accurate--the women there (of my age)seemed so focussed on meeting men, it was a bit crazy. (And I mean no disrespect to the Brits.)

It's not about being LS's and myself being desirable (although thanks for the compliment), it's a numbers game. Head out of the big city and you'll find that the numbers shift in favour of women.

And, we're not just defending women like ourselves. LS and I are both giving examples, which I think is slightly different. Consider it an exercise in broadening people's perspectives.

Posted by: ie at November 26, 2010 1:03 PM

Maurice, As a fellow New Yorker, I can't agree completely with your statement regarding women being unable to find men. I have a mix of friends from here on Long Island as well as those who live in the city. The women in the city who are having trouble are usually going club hopping and picking up Jersey Shore like men.Or the prize they have their eye on is majorly wealthy. The women I know that were successful meeting, marrying, and having children met their men at work, church, and doing volunteer work. There were also success stories of friends meeting people through friends with similar interests. I'm not saying they weren't interested in dating, but most weren't on the prowl for a man, it was something that came about in a natural circumstance and not a set up.

And I don't think that ie or LS are claiming they are so hot. I have a feeling its more the confidence and self-assurance they project as they grow older and wiser.

Posted by: Kristen at November 26, 2010 1:23 PM

@Kristen I'm going to tell them that - stay away from those Jersey Shore guys!

If anything, it's that they'd never consider a guy from the Jersey Shore. That's what limits some women in NYC I think. They're snobs. That's also why they're not going to go to some small country town to find a man. Because IE is right, the ratio of men to women is usually much better in small towns. My brother lives in a nice town in PA that's like a lumber camp. You go out at night and the bars are filled with men. It's literally about five to one, men to women. These women don't want those men though. They want the hip upwardly mobile guys that they can find in NYC.

Posted by: Maurice at November 26, 2010 1:53 PM

Personally, Maurice, I never looked for a man in a bar and neither did any of my friends. I wouldn't say all women in NYC are snobs. Yes, there are some. I'd call it more desperation for the majority that can't seem to make a man stick around, and again, looking in the wrong places. You may disagree with me, but I am a firm believer in the fact that a smart, confident, self-assured woman is the most attractive to most men. Men can smell desperate miles away and that always attracts the love em and leave em variety.

Posted by: Kristen at November 26, 2010 2:35 PM

Look, attractive people, of any age, have more options. That's just the way it is. I'd say thin is more important than age. An overweight, unattractive 22 yr old has far fewer options than a slim, attractive 42 yr old. So, it's not really an age thing but an appearance thing....unless you're looking to have children. Then, I agree that a woman needs to narrow down her choices more quickly, but, in this day and age, she doesn't have to be desperate about it. 30 is not too old.

At any rate, the most important thing to men usually isn't having children. It's having sex. And, as long as a woman keeps herself fit and sexy, she'll always have a choice of partners.

When dating, almost everyone has to consider whether the opposite sex will find them attractive. Maybe there are a few rare people on the planet who never have to give that a second thought. Perhaps Angelina Jolie or Gisele Bunchen never wonder, "Will that guy find me attractive?" but for most of us that is what dating is all about...figuring out who we appeal to and marketing ourselves to that audience.

Sure, a hot 22 yr old has the most options, and probably the most options of her entire life, but that doesn't mean she should settle down right then and there. If she keeps herself in shape, she'll still have options at 32, 42, and 52...because she's attractive, and, with effort and upkeep, beauty doesn't usually go completely away, and, as Nicole said, it doesn't necessarily lead to the happiest, longest lasting unions either.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 26, 2010 2:36 PM

Well, I don't know about you LS, but I'm going to go with Maurice's assumption that we're totally hot! :)

Posted by: ie at November 26, 2010 3:18 PM

lol, ie. I'm not super hot, but I am THIN. As Amy will attest, that probably dramatically increases my options past many women half my age.

When I was 20, I had my pick of men, but that didn't mean I chose wisely. I wish I knew then what I know now. Since almost all men wanted me, that included a high percentage of shallow jerks.

It takes experience and maturity to learn to wade through that. Sometimes, having fewer options is better. The goal is not to have the most choices but to find a quality partner.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 26, 2010 4:15 PM

Well, I don't know about you LS, but I'm going to go with Maurice's assumption that we're totally hot! :)

I've always assumed that ie! Goes for both of you :)

More anecdotal and therefore useless evidence - last night I hit on a 52 year old woman - I'm 37 - and I tell you now, I wasn't thinking "this is the best I can do", "has her divorce made her bitter", "has she slept around" or anything else other than she was hot (and how!) and we were enjoying talking. A lot of the discussion here about how people choose a partner is based on practical concerns. But people don't act that rationally. Ask people what they want - fit, attractive, blonde, stable, fertile, whatever - then look at who they end up with. Everyone has their non-negotiables, but sometimes it's a shorter list than you think. Love really can blind sometimes.

Most women aren't sexually attractive past their early thirties. They might be nice looking, but they lose the sexual dimension of their attractiveness.

Mike - that's complete and utter bullshit. My ex, 6 years older than me, still makes my heart skip a beat when I see her. Ok, you said "most women" - but in my experience even that isn't true.

Posted by: Ltw at November 26, 2010 5:51 PM

I agree completely with Ltw and lovelysoul. I generally find a woman in her 40's or later, that has done the appropriate upkeep, way sexier than anyone in their twenties. Plus, they have tricks up their sleeve that'll make your dick spin.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 26, 2010 7:18 PM

Wow, Thag. You really sound pathetic. That's right, grab whatever you're dating in your early 20s lest you fail to snag a man.

I'm guessing you're in the burbs somewhere. Most of my friends didn't marry until their mid 30s, and the ones who married in their 20s mostly got divorced.

Posted by: Gail at November 26, 2010 8:58 PM

"I'm not talking about "most women's realities," whatever that means, I'm talking about the reality of the world." -Thag Jones

So tell me, Thag, what are your credentials? How are you an authority on the reality of the entire world? Upon what research are you basing your statements and bashing those of Amy, ie and lovelysoul? Your information must be based upon more than your own experience, or it is just another woman's opinion and therefore anecdotal.

Posted by: Rozita Tee at November 26, 2010 9:36 PM

Gail, that's not what I said and you know it, unless your reading comprehension is seriously lacking. And another ad hominem attack, well done. You're guessing I'm in the burbs somewhere? lol Great debating skills there.

Rozita, appealing to credentials is a fallacy. Amy doesn't have "credentials" either. I probably could have phrased that better though, sure, but I think you know what I meant as well, but since you don't really have much of an argument, you are picking out one poorly phrased statement out of an otherwise good argument and having an attempt at proving me wrong. Try harder.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 7:50 AM

All this back and forth is irrelevant. A sane man will avoid getting married, cohabiting or having kids. There is no good reason to.

Posted by: The Truth at November 27, 2010 7:50 AM

Folks I don't think that we need to go to the other extreme to prove a point. If you look at the data, marriages that begin in the later 20's show the greatest likelihood of success, which diminishes as you go younger or older. Think of a bell curve. The idea that only marriages among thirty somethings work is a lot of BS. But it's a claim that I see peddled all the time. As my wife says, it's MBB - More Boomer Bullshit. Let's stop lying to young people to make ourselves feel better.

Also no one is obliged to want to have sex with anyone else. Mike doesn't have to find middle aged women sexy, just like young women don't have to find me sexy. It's a personal preference, not a moral choice.

Something that you have to factor when discussing women over forty is that many of them aren't interested in sex any longer. So they don't care whether Mike wants them. That's the 900lb gorilla in the room. If you're going to claim that men are obliged to pursue these women, you should at least acknowledge that many of them aren't going to be interested.

And before you jump on me, look at the facts. Loss of libido is a very very common issue for women in and around menopause, and afterwords. I have immediate family who've been dealing with this issue for several years now. It's apparent from what they've been told by counselors and physicians that their experience is totally normal.

Posted by: Maurice at November 27, 2010 7:55 AM

>> "A big part of it is about maturity"
> Which you probably don't have at 23.

Whatever her age, the LW's letter demonstrates she doesn't have maturity.

"I can't say I'd do the same. I do love him, but I once read that once you doubt the love, you've stopped loving that person forever."

Yeah, always good to live by a vague collection of senseless, context-less little "rules of thumb" that you pick up. Love is something you need to work on in a long-term relationship continually, your whole life; relationships are something two people build (and re-build, and re-build), not something that falls from the sky and lands on your head and magically happens to you. Unless you learn that, all your relationships will fail.

But, instead of thinking, you can live by little slogans.

"he's theoretically everything I want"

Wow, try not to sound too excited about him.

It really doesn't sound like you're in love with him. It does sound like you need to go through the 'playing the field' phase, which is usually described more euphemistically as 'finding yourself' or 'growing up' or 'making the mistakes of youth' or any of the many ways people try dress up the behavior to try make it sound less slutty. Do it, it's not necessarily slutty, it's just natural. If that's how you feel, rather have some fun while you're young, the responsibility and parenting and family and marriage stuff can come when you're a bit older.

Posted by: Lobster at November 27, 2010 8:16 AM

OK, I really must leave off responding to such feeble arguments as this could go on forever. I'll just leave you with this thought: I think the main difference here between me and you ladies is that you refuse to listen to any man who doesn't echo your opinions. Try listening to men who have not been brainwashed by feminism and you'll get a more realistic response.

I don't ask women for relationship advice anymore because most of them give out lousy advice, although it seems like we're all so eager to advise each other. When the men speak up around here, they're shot down unless they're serious outliers like the 37 year-old above who found a hot 52 year-old.

I've heard a lot of what men talk about amongst themselves for some reason as I've often ended up being "one of the guys" and therefore they've tended to speak freely around me. What they say amongst themselves is what you hear on here from the ones you seem to loathe the most. But hey, keep spinning those wheels if you like.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 8:19 AM

Maurice, no one is going to extremes here. We're just relating our experiences. And I'm certainly not dictating to men what they "should" find attractive. The fact is that I'm reporting what happens with me and my friends. That's it. Of course people are allowed to have their preferences. But notice I said people, and not just "men."

Look, it's just that from what I see, my older friends are NOT having a harder time hooking up. Seriously.

I'm around young people a lot and it shocks me that even women in their 20s are afraid of letting "the one" slip through their fingers if they don't hold on tight. I mean, Christ, I remember a friend of mine in Grade 8 acting this way when her boyfriend broke up with her! She was all of 14 and thought she was never going to meet someone again.

So what do these 20 somethings do? They marry the guy because they're afraid and then they get divorced a few years later when they realize their decision was based on fear. The size of their "windshield," so to speak, is a lot smaller at that point in their lives because they haven't got the life experience or the faith to believe that they'll have other opportunities down the road. They need to turn a few corners to be able to see it.

And as for your stats about marriages and the bell curve and the 20s business--and where did you get that info, btw?--is moot because most of my friends who hook up later on DON'T get married.
At least that's the situation in Canada. Weddings are expensive and most people don't feel the need to have the state sanction their union. My mom and her boyfriend lived together for 10 years and she's of a far more conservative generation.

Most of these older couples cohabit because most of them have done the marriage thing and don't believe in it anymore. They also have a lot more in the way of assets and they're now way more aware of how the state can intervene and decide how these asets get divvied up if there's a divorce. And they don't want the state intervening.

A few threads ago, I wrote about how there was a small phenom happening in my city where couples (usually middle-aged or older) were getting married while one partner was on his or her deathbed. I found it strange that so many of these marriages seemed to be taking place. There was also an article in the city's largest newspaper about this.

Then, a friend of mine who married his long-term girlfriend (in the same way) explained that they needed to be married for him to have the authorization to sign a DNR (do not resuscitate) in the event his partner was too out of it to do it herself. Or if he needed to make the decision to pull the plug.

Of course everyone has preferences, Maurice. But notice I said "everyone," and not just men. I'm a brunette which automatically puts me out of the running with me who prefer blondes. I'm not losing sleep over it because I know there are plenty of men who prefer brunettes too. Some men like women with big breasts. Fair enough...no one's arguing about preferences here, we're just reporting our experiences.

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 8:29 AM

When the men speak up around here, they're shot down unless they're serious outliers like the 37 year-old above who found a hot 52 year-old.

Oh, please. Shall we all let out a big collective boohoo for booyou? Everyone here is "shot down" if other disagree with them.

My boyfriend is a 59-year-old man's man who once worked on an assembly line in Detroit, by the way -- nobody's pussy boy -- and he's not only glad to have a woman who's smart, in great shape, always sweet to him, and 46. He spent a bit of yesterday taking pictures of my butt on the move (see my blog for one of the more tasteful ones), and is cool is hell. (We also hung out yesterday with my cool friend Little Shiva, who wears outfits made out of trash and wore a polar bear mask all yesterday when we were with her, and that was totally cool/no problem for him because, as a real man, he doesn't care what people think, and gets that she's a great person.)

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 8:40 AM

I've heard a lot of what men talk about amongst themselves for some reason as I've often ended up being "one of the guys" and therefore they've tended to speak freely around me. What they say amongst themselves is what you hear on here from the ones you seem to loathe the most.

Men have talked straight to me my entire adult life because it's clear that I like men, and that I'm curious and don't think male sexuality is wrong, just different from female sexuality. My advice is also based on research on how men are. Also, I sometimes write for Hustler. I think my cred with guys is pretty well-established. Another who is realistic is my friend Dr. Catherine Salmon who, with Don Symons ("The Evolution of Human Sexuality") wrote a brilliant little book with a lot about the differences between men and women and the probable reasons why: Warrior Lovers: Erotic Fiction, Evolution and Female Sexuality.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 9:09 AM

Here's another perspective on the marrying-before-your-expiration-date debate: how many guys do you know that want to get married by age 23? I'm 20 and I sometimes joke about wanting to be married by age 22/23, and my male and female friends alike look at me like I'm crazy. And I'm pretty sure that if a girl laid it out that she *had* to be married by that age, every eligible male within a 50 mile radius would run away screaming. For a 35 year old man this probably isn't a problem, but most girls in their early 20s just aren't dating someone this much older. (Like I said I'm 20 and a junior in college and I don't know ANYONE my age with a S.O. more than a few years out of undergrad).

So if you're a woman dating men within a couple years of your age (which is the most common age difference for couples), then you're probably going to have to wait until your late 20s/early 30s when most guys are interested in settling down OR date someone 5-10 years older. But a relationship with someone 5-10 years older is most likely only going to work when you're post-college and self-sufficient, which puts you in your mid-20s anyway.

Posted by: Shannon at November 27, 2010 9:22 AM

"I've heard a lot of what men talk about amongst themselves for some reason as I've often ended up being "one of the guys" and therefore they've tended to speak freely around me. What they say amongst themselves is what you hear on here from the ones you seem to loathe the most. But hey, keep spinning those wheels if you like."

Nobody is saying that guys don't talk about 22 yr olds...and fantasize about being with them. Nobody is suggesting that men don't find women that age attractive. But who a man in his 30s - 50s actually dates is something else.

As ie, says, it's simply untrue that women in their 30s and 40s are having a hard time finding partners. Despite your assertions (backed up by no evidence whatsoever), this is totally false.

I'm 46 and I'm getting married in April to a 48 yr old, who's in excellent shape and adores me. We've been together for 3 years. Before that, I dated plenty and could've married several guys. Ie and I have both been in the dating pool recently and we're telling you that it isn't hard for women our age to find interested men.

And, like I said, it isn't because I'm Maxim-level hot. But I'm thin and fit. I weigh 115 pds. I have a nice body for my age...or, really, any age. Look around - there are 25 yr olds in horrible shape! Guys don't want them just because they're 25. Guys want to be with women who are sexy and fit, and those women actually span all age brackets. Amy is the perfect example of this.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 27, 2010 9:30 AM

Shannon, that's a good point. As to this though,

But a relationship with someone 5-10 years older is most likely only going to work when you're post-college and self-sufficient

I'm not sure most men are all that concerned with you being "self-sufficient," particularly if it's evident that you won't be a total sponger when you're done with college. You'd be surprised I think. WE value earning ability in a man, men value other things in women if they're looking for a mother for future children and so forth. An awful lot of women who put off children until they're older wished they could have done it when they were younger, and some put it off too long and miss the fertility boat altogether.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 9:31 AM

I've also written recently about how men tend to not be ready to marry until they're settled in their careers and earning adequate to good money. Being 21 and looking for a job now is seriously tough -- and I know that because I've been trying to help a 21-year-old friend, daughter of a friend of mine, find a job. She'd be the kind of employee any employer would be glad to have, but there just aren't jobs out there now.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 9:40 AM

When a man tells you he finds your confidence and self-sufficiency sexy, he's probably just stroking your ego. This is just an opinion of course, but it really seems like projection on women's part to assume that men value this over a nice body and face, or a genuinely nice disposition.

Posted by: Sox at November 27, 2010 9:46 AM

"I've heard a lot of what men talk about amongst themselves for some reason as I've often ended up being "one of the guys" and therefore they've tended to speak freely around me."

But...you're not in a relationship, are you? I guess all this special snowflake insight into men that you have isn't really getting you anywhere. So forgive me if I take your opinion with a grain of salt; I wouldn't take diet advice from the obese either.

For the record, my informal polls into 18-21 year old guys show that 95% of them find (well-kept and in-shape) women in their 40s very hot. Especially, for whatever reason, Sarah Palin. I'm only 20 and wouldn't be offended by their opinions either way, so they have no reason not to speak freely in front of me, and that's the verdict.

Posted by: Shannon at November 27, 2010 9:49 AM

Oh, and one piece of advice that often seems to get over looked is that it really is better to put of sexual intercourse. There are men who will tell you what you want to hear to get that and then you are not building anything but giving yourself away and wasting time.

I know it's especially difficult these days when there is little moral incentive to "keep your honour/dignity" and it's more or less expected that "dating" includes sexual intercourse, but it's worth going against the tide on this if you want a good quality man. It doesn't mean you're a prude (boy do I get tired of that one) and anyone who would say that is not worth your time. You don't have to prove yourself capable of hot sex to everyone on the planet.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 9:54 AM

Shannon, who are these guys you're polling? I'd be interested to see *how many* women in their 40s they actually find hot, and if they would actually choose them over your average in-shape 18-22 year old.

The only credentials I can offer as an authority are the fact that I'm an average guy in his mid-20's who knows what average guys like. I've been doing these "informal polls" with my peers since I was 13 and I can tell you that men of any age would rarely take a 40 year old over a 23 year old.

Posted by: Sox at November 27, 2010 9:57 AM

When it comes to women and men and sexuality, I really admire someone like Nina Hartley, the porn actress. She's feminist, but pro-sex and is probably one of the best experts on desire. (Let's face it: in the business she's in she should be.)

I love her frankness and I'm glad she's around because she's got so many things interesting things to say about sex, things that don't necessarily conform to conventional ideas about it. She's either 50 or close to, and she's still going strong.

There's a whole world of diversity out there when it comes to desire. It's not as simple as just having the body of a 22 year-old.

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 10:00 AM

Shannon, why do you assume I'm not in a relationship? Whether I am or not, the point is, I know what I've done wrong. I'm not advising anyone to go the route I went and that's the whole point. You don't think people can learn from their mistakes? If you want advice on marrying young then, why don't you find people who have done that and ask them? That would probably be the best place for advice on that, if your joking about it was a sort of testing of the waters.

These young guys may find older women hot, but if they want to raise a family, they won't be looking for a woman in her 40s, just like they'll find sluts hot but won't want to marry them later.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 10:04 AM

I'd be interested to see *how many* women in their 40s they actually find hot, and if they would actually choose them over your average in-shape 18-22 year old.

Here's one of my 40-something friends who married in her 30s: http://nancyrommelmann.com/

She's gorgeous, in the best shape of her life, a fantastic cook, an exceptional and accomplished writer, and a great person, who's both mature and kind, without being a sap.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 10:12 AM

"I'm an average guy in his mid-20's who knows what average guys like. I've been doing these "informal polls" with my peers since I was 13 and I can tell you that men of any age would rarely take a 40 year old over a 23 year old"

Yes, of course, in some fantasy poll. But, realistically, most guys can't date 23 yr olds unless they're in their 20s themselves or fabulously wealthy.

This is all an exercise in theory. But, in reality, few people get their fantasy choice of partners. It's not like every 40 yr old guy is being offered a choice between a 23 yr old vs a 40 yr old.

And most people will choose someone to settle down with differently than who they'd choose to have a fling with. I had relationships with much younger men, but I didn't want to marry them, and they probably didn't want to marry me, but they found me sexy and interesting and and we had some fun.

But, no doubt, when most of them marry, it will likely be with someone closer to them in age. I have no problem with that, as I want the same.

We're not saying 20 yr old guys should want to be with 40 yr old women, at least long-term.

But, I speak from experience that many 40 year old guys do want to be with 40 yr old women. They may fantasize about 23 yr olds, but they wouldn't want to marry one either - even if they had the choice. They're afraid of the immaturity...the pregnancies (especially if they already have kids and child support payments)...and the drama/infidelity/divorce that often comes with younger women who haven't found themselves yet.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 27, 2010 10:15 AM

I mentioned this a long time ago, but I'll bring it up again. When my mom lived in Fla, the town newspaper there announced marriages and gave the ages of the people getting married.

I loved following that column because it gave me such a fresh perspective on love and marriage. (The province I live in has the highest rate of cohabitation in the country, but I'm pretty sure the facts for cohabitation are in line with what I saw in that paper.)

Men might fantasize about younger women, but the reality is that a lot of them are marrying women their own age (give or take a few years).

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 10:16 AM

@Sox-I think confidence is part of the package that goes towards making someone attractive. It really seems like the bare minimum towards what you'd want in a partner. I mean, think about the opposite-would you really want to date a woman who was insecure, neurotic, and self-doubting? This would be the woman who is constantly asking you if she looks fat, who flirts with other guys to boost her self-esteem, who goes by what her friends say rather than what she really thinks, who is constantly running you through a gauntlet to "prove" your love.

As far as self-sufficiency-that just means finding someone who can take care of themselves to the extent that they don't see you as a replacement for mommy and daddy and/or a walking paycheck. It might not be especially sexy but the alternative is completely unappealing right?

Posted by: Shannon at November 27, 2010 10:30 AM

I think the real issue, and why men often make such negative comments about older women is that it's true that so many PEOPLE let themselves go with age. No question that there are far fewer "hot" women in middle age. Even many in their late 20s/30s get fat and live in sweat pants and mom jeans.

And I think men, being visual, are impacted by this more, and some obviously have resentments about it, so their overall impression of older women becomes negative.

Yet, there are still those of us who care about looking good, and, because we do, we don't have much problem attracting men. So, to me, once again, it's not an age thing as much as an appearance thing.

Anyone who is out of shape or unattractive, at any age, is going to have a harder time. Here in FL, I know women 10-15 yrs younger than me who have tanned themselves into leather. They look my age and I (thanks to sunscreen) look theirs.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 27, 2010 10:33 AM

the alternative is completely unappealing right?

You offered AN alternative, there are others, such as a woman who has a nice disposition, can cook, is good with kids, etc.. A lack of financial self-sufficiency doesn't mean she's moronically insecure about herself. And before you jump to conclusions, I'm offering AN alternative to yours as an example, not saying we should go back to the 50s.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 10:37 AM

I know exactly what you mean about sunscreen LS! I dated a Southern guy (actually a couple of Southern guys) a while back. Being a damn yankee, I found my age guess radar way off because of all the sun damaged skin.

Totally agree about keeping yourself together. Seems like I'm always wanting to bring up French women. They look sexy and elegant at just about any age ... .

Posted by: AntoniaB at November 27, 2010 11:21 AM

I felt I should comment here, because there is a lot of negativity towards mature women. I'm 51 and I've maintained my body and my looks, so I have no shortage of attention from men, and to belittle this attention by saying that the men are only interested in meaningless sex, assumes that they're somehow interested in more than meaningless sex with the hot 20 year olds. Initially that's what men see in women, their desirability. And what I've noticed from my extensive dating experience is that men in my age group don't have all the power and choice. Both men and women have some degree of control and power in the dating dynamic. It's basic supply and demand: you make sure you're a hot commodity and there will be a big demand for you. Then you pick who you want out of the crowd. I cherry pick the hottest guys according to my own discerning criteria, because I can.

My boyfriend is 29. I've told him he's free to chase 20 year olds if he likes, but he prefers my experience and confidence.

Posted by: Chrissy at November 27, 2010 11:50 AM

Hooray for sunscreen. I was one of the few young women among my peers to use it and/or stay out of the sun.

I lived in the middle east for a few years and saw a lot of sun-damaged skin (self-inflicted through tanning). I was white as a ghost and was tempted to tan at times, but now I'm really glad I didn't.

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 12:40 PM

@Sox - "When a man tells you he finds your confidence and self-sufficiency sexy, he's probably just stroking your ego."

I think you're wrong here. You'd be correct if that confidence and self-sufficiency was the only thing, but it's a crucial starting point for sexiness.

@Shannon - Thag mentioned that you should ask someone who was married very young what they think of your plan. Here I am. I married when I was twenty (I had a very good reason who is now 19 years old) and am now divorced. I don't regret the marriage, but holy cow did I have a lot of miserable years.

The last ten years of the seventeen year marriage went something like this: "I'm a man with responsibilities and would never kill myself, but it sure would be nice if that oncoming truck would cross the yellow line."

It's not good to live like that. You may think I'm being flippant. I'm not. In those days, I would have loved to have been dead. There wasn't a day that went by during that last ten years -- that's half of your young life -- that I didn't think fondly of ways that I might accidentally die.

So ... There's one take on marrying young :) Have a great day!

P.S. -- I'm feeling much better now.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 27, 2010 1:36 PM

@JonQ: I have a friend who's husband left her and they had five relatively young children. Well, the oldest was a teenager and the youngest was about five. I don't know how old these two were when they married, but I do know she's a few years younger than me.

It was sad that the marriage ended and my friend took it extremely hard (which I don't blame her for). A lot of people thought her husband was a jerk.

I don't know all the ins and outs of it, but I heard him once say that he felt he had a choice between divorce and suicide and that suicide almost won out.

I really felt for him then. It's a no-win situation for him and his ex-wife, but I'm glad he didn't kill himself. His decision had to be really tough.

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 1:58 PM

Herbert! Herbert!

At about 4:25, this is the essence of the attitude here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRewcZXEMb8

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 2:36 PM

IE that number, about the age of marriage, is one of those generic divorce statistics that you'll see. I don't know the original source.

Let me try to give an example of what I'm arguing against, and I think you'll see that I'm not challenging your experience. It's my impression that most of the women here are coming from a different place.

Several years ago I'd taken a contract with a university in the city to do some IT stuff for one of their grad programs. The administrative office where I worked was probably 75% female, and the good majority of the staff were over 35. We also had a lot of grad students working in the office, who were almost all female. So it was a very estrogen rich environment. Even the men were effeminate.

Well the female grad students usually had a boyfriend, or some young man they liked, and the office ladies were always very eager to hear about him. What I noticed though is that any time a young woman would talk about getting serious, or heaven forbid marriage, these ladies would try to dissuade her. It was the same sort of stuff you always hear - she'll end up divorced, she doesn't know what she wants, she's scared and insecure, yada yada yada. This was their automatic response to any mention of a serious commitment. Keep in mind these are graduate students we're talking about. The youngest may have been 24 or 25, but most were in their later twenties or early thirties. They weren't a bunch of wide eyed teenagers.

All of this 'advice' was offered under the pretense that the older women were so much more sophisticated and mature than the grads. They really weren't though. Most of them were divorced or never married. Their relationships were all F'd up. They'd go from telling some young woman that she should test her relationship by breaking up, to complaining that they were being played by men ten minutes later. After a while it pissed me off that they were preying on these young women. Because it was kind of depraved, like they were deliberately trying to sabotage their relationships to make themselves feel better.

My wife has commented on the same thing, though she says it's just white women. I think that it comes from what's fundamentally a very negative and pessimistic view of marriage. It's the belief that all relationships are doomed to failure so you should just fuck around until you're burnt out, and then you get married.

Posted by: Maurice at November 27, 2010 2:50 PM

@ie -- Due to my upbringing and my father's good example, I didn't see divorce as an option. To me, it's just not what a real man does. Divorce was my ex-wife's idea and it was the best idea she ever had. I thought I'd be living like that for the rest of my life.

I'm unbelievably happy now and very thankful that I'm still alive to enjoy my kids and the many years of adventure that I have ahead of me.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 27, 2010 3:25 PM

Thag, I didn't offer an argument. I just offered yet another piece of anecdotal evidence and cited it as such.

By admitting that you have no credentials, your opinion is no more valid than that of anyone else, Herbert. Perhaps your male buddies are telling you what you want to hear because they view you as a challenge. They want to get YOU into the sack!

Posted by: Rozita at November 27, 2010 3:27 PM

Sunscreen is my secret. We just priced it (here in Paris) out by my friends M. and C.'s (they're at the edge of Paris at Porte de Orleans métro stop) because I buy about 13 to 15 of them when I'm here. 10.90 per there, for the 50 ml Anthelios fluide pour la visage, but probably cheaper -- probably 9.90 -- at the discount pharmacy near rue de Rennes (6th arrondissement). It's the most expensive beauty product I use. Other than that, I buy Revlon, etc., no-brand stuff from Sally's, and use Cetaphil and St. Ives to wash my face. The big idiots are the women who go out in the sun and then use that face cream that's $100 plus because it's made from ground up, reused sheep bladders or something.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 3:29 PM

@Maurice. Fair enough. I can imagine the environment you're talking about because I've experienced it myself.

Some places are just like that. A tide of some attitude or another takes over and the next thing you know, you've got a situation like the one you're describing.

When I lived and worked in Toronto, I found I had some similar experiences. The difference, of course, was that *I* was the young one and the older women I worked with seemed to be turned off marriage. I wasn't into marriage anyway, but I knew I was surrounded by women who weren't exactly "for it." Not surprisingly, in a recent poll, Toronto was voted the "least happy" city in Canada. I certainly didn't see a lot of joy when I was there.

I don't know what to say...these attitudes develop in some places and the next thing you know, everyone gets really cynical about love and life.

Right now, I work in close proximity to two gay men. Both of them are lamenting the shortage of suitable partners (and this is Montreal we're talking about--a very gay-friendly city!).

In my opinion (very anecdotal, btw) there isn't a shortage, but somehow, maybe, their perceptions have been shaped by negative experience. I don't know a lot about the gay world, so cannot speak authoritatively at all, but these two colleagues do seem to be attracted to men who either aren't openly gay or are bi-sexual. In other words, they're attracted to men who are ambivalent.

I think that their choices are shaping their perceptions and I did try saying that to one of them. He was open to my opinion, so I hope he sees how he's limiting himself, but I also think he's also just in the process of maybe getting out of that particular hole and so it won't be happening any time soon.

It's funny too, because he's 35 and feeling like he wants to settle down...and his age corresponds to the trend we're talking about here.

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 3:31 PM

In case anyone's in Paris, probably the best prices on drugstore items (Anthelios, Roche, etc.) are here: http://www.stay.com/paris/shopping/10897/pharmacie-fouhety

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 3:32 PM

Ie - my eyes bugged out. One of my closest friends is gay and lives in Montreal - has done for about a decade. Although he's from Quebec originally, he's lived around the world - in particular Buenos Aires, Oxford and Washington, DC. He's gregarious and never has trouble meeting people. He is *very down* on the gay scene in Montreal, says it's extremely superficial - very looks and clothes orientated. It's driving him crazy as he's extremely intellectual.

So you can see that your post struck a chord with me!

Posted by: AntoniaB at November 27, 2010 4:04 PM

I should introduce him to my colleague! He's a pretty smart guy!

Posted by: ie at November 27, 2010 4:29 PM

Perhaps your male buddies are telling you what you want to hear because they view you as a challenge. They want to get YOU into the sack!

Why the hell would this be what I want to hear? You just don't get it do you. There there, go back to sleep, here's your blue pill.

Posted by: Thag Jones at November 27, 2010 4:57 PM

Hahaha Ie - a great plan!

Posted by: AntoniaB at November 27, 2010 5:02 PM

@Maurice- as far as the behavior you're describing of older women dissuading younger women from marrying, men do the exact same thing. I see it a lot on this blog actually: warnings like "never get married" or "you can't trust western women." In fact, quote from The Truth at 7:50:

"All this back and forth is irrelevant. A sane man will avoid getting married, cohabiting or having kids. There is no good reason to."

I do think that these warnings stem from two different motivations. The first is bitterness coming from a desire to sabotage out of jealousy/competition, ie "if I can't get a man then you shouldn't be able to either." This seems pretty common with women (like the administrators you described) but rare with men. And it's not just limited to older women; I've seen this behavior since I was 13, generally by girls who want their friends to be single like them. Often these women will be unabashedly hypocritical; they'll encourage their friends to break up with boyfriends then turn around and dump their friends the second they meet a guy.

The second is bitterness stemming from an overall hatred and lack of success with the opposite sex. These are the men whining about how American women are all golddiggers who only want alpha males, or the women complaining that men are shallow and look-ist. These people seem to want to enact revenge on the opposite sex by persuading everyone to refuse marriage or mail-order Russian brides or whatever. More common among men I think, but also found within the feminist-types.

But overall, the attitude "all relationships are doomed to failure so you should just fuck around until you're burnt out, and then you get married" is absolutely NOT limited to women.

Posted by: Shannon at November 27, 2010 5:59 PM

@Sox-my informal polls started right around the 2008 elections when I repeatedly heard guys talking about how hot Sarah Palin was. I don't find 45 year old men attractive so I had a hard time believing that a guy my age would find a 45 year old woman attractive, but apparently they do. I'm not saying that the average man would pick a 40 year old over a 23 year old (and as lovelysoul pointed out most 40 year old men don't even get this option), just that the guys I know do find (some) 40 year old women attractive in addition to 23 year old women. (I expect this is partially novelty-driven; when you're a 20 year old guy, 20 year old girls are nothing special).

@the self-sufficiency thing: having the ability to be a successful housewife/stay-at-home mom IS an example of self-sufficiency. What I'm talking about is, I know way too many 20 and 21 year olds who can barely do a load of laundry or run a dishwasher, let alone pay bills or pull in an income. These people have literally nothing to bring to the table in terms of being a marriage partner and probably won't until they live on their own for a couple years and are, you know, self-sufficient.

Posted by: Shannon at November 27, 2010 6:13 PM

It appears that much of the conversation is about physical appeal, as opposed to mental maturity. I'm under the impression that being a great wife and mother is about significantly more than being physically appealing.

Also, I think it's problematic that many focus on the ease of women being able to reproduce without considering men's roles. The quality of sperm declines as a man ages. Where's the societal dedication to making sure children get the best genetic material from their fathers?

Furthermore, the brain's frontal lobe, which is responsible for some of our more complex functions, doesn't even develop until about age 25. Shouldn't this factor into discussions about marrying and especially about reproducing?

Surely there's a wise set of trade-offs in all of this.

Posted by: octavia at November 27, 2010 6:28 PM

Furthermore, the brain's frontal lobe, which is responsible for some of our more complex functions, doesn't even develop until about age 25. Shouldn't this factor into discussions about marrying and especially about reproducing? Surely there's a wise set of trade-offs in all of this.

I've written about this before, and it factored into this column, although I didn't mention it in the column again.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 8:12 PM

Maurice, misery loves company - in both genders. It's very common for guys to make fun of their buddies for falling really hard for a woman. They'll raz and tease him, often resulting in a breakup. Most of them are jealous or worried that their buddy won't be around to hang out with anymore.

The majority of women (and men) are not very attractive. So, there's a resentment towards those who are attractive enough to have a relationship.

Posted by: lovelysoul at November 27, 2010 8:40 PM

So, there's a resentment towards those who are attractive enough to have a relationship.

There's a woman who's known Gregg for probably 15 years who HATES me. She maybe could've gotten something going with him, but never valued him, never saw through the most superficial stuff to what a great guy he is. The thing is, when I met him, he looked a little rough around the edges (he really always will be, but I love that about him). That day we met, when I flirted with him, he was wearing a shirt that looked like it had the mange and the oldest tennis shoes I've ever seen on anyone but a homeless man. But, he's my physical type and he had these smart-guy glasses on, so I flirted with him. And now, because I'm a girl who always dresses up, he always looks like a gentleman (if one who's slightly disheveled) when we're together. Like when you're holding up a dress in a store, and suddenly, it becomes THE dress to have for some girl standing near you, I only had to show up at a party with him in a blazer and the girl blazed white-hot hatred for me that couldn't have otherwise been provoked. A friend later explained it to me and I felt sorry for her.

And I do have requirements -- height, rationality, being an original thinker, ethics, being a classy guy -- but you can put a guy in a new shirt, you can't put him in new character.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 27, 2010 9:41 PM

Amy, I think that's why some women, some of the time (not always), keep their relationships under wraps until they've been with the guy for a while and they're solid.

For example, I once started a relationship at work with a very desirable guy and I kept quiet about it for a few months, and asked him to do the same. He didn't like the secrecy, but my instincts told me that there might be jealous nay-sayers at work who might get up to some mischief with us. I wanted a chance to get established without that interference.

It may have just been me being over-protective, but I felt really strongly about it. And I've seen girlfriends of mine do the same. A really close friend of mine dated someone for an entire year before she came clean and admitted she'd been with someone.

I was actually a bit hurt because I'm a 100% cheerleader when it comes to my friends and their relationships. The only time I'd say anything negative is if there was something glaringly wrong. (Like the guy is wearing a wedding band!) Even then, the most I would say would be something like "well, he seems like a nice guy, but be careful." I figure that if the relationship doesn't work out, my friend's going to need to feel she can come to someone non-judgemental for support.

Envy is so destructive and when I was younger, I definitely remember feeling it, so Maurice's comments struck a chord. But I also remember a moment in my life, when I was around 20, thinking that I desperately wanted people cheering for ME. So I made a really conscious effort to tame those ugly feelings and force myself to be happy for my friends' successes, both personal and professional (even if I didn't feel it).

After a while, I didn't have to force it, it became natural, and looking back, I'm glad I had the maturity at 20 to know that that was the right choice.

Now if I could just get the rest of that maturity thing down...:)

Posted by: ie at November 28, 2010 4:18 AM

"The last ten years of the seventeen year marriage went something like this: "I'm a man with responsibilities and would never kill myself, but it sure would be nice if that oncoming truck would cross the yellow line."

It's not good to live like that. You may think I'm being flippant. I'm not. In those days, I would have loved to have been dead. There wasn't a day that went by during that last ten years -- that's half of your young life -- that I didn't think fondly of ways that I might accidentally die."

This is the kind of thing I was thinking of when I said people should wait longer before marrying or having kids, so that they don't end up trapped.

Posted by: Pirate Jo at November 28, 2010 11:03 AM

There's a good practical reason for men to pursue women in their thirties, which is that you're more likely to see her for who she is, or at least the way that she's going to remain for a while. From what I've seen, women can change dramatically from their twenties to thirties. Their personality and appearance in their thirties is more indicative of what they'll be like as they get older.

Many people don't handle the transition into their thirties well. It seems like a make or break point. They become disappointed with life, or just don't know how to adapt to adulthood. I know guys who'd married women in their twenties, and you wouldn't even recognize many of them a few years later. That's not just their appearance, their personalities have changed dramatically. They've gone from being fun and interesting to dull and controlling. The last thing you want is to find yourself tied down to someone that you can't stand at 35.

Posted by: ray at November 28, 2010 12:51 PM

It's actually not true that marrying while in one's 20s is correlated with a long-lasting marriage. States with a high rate of young marriage and young pregnancy have high rates of divorce. States where the average age at first marriage is higher have lower rates of divorce. This article is a stupid way to frame the data because they are making it red state vs blue state, but I still find it significant. The columnist says in one situation families are forming adults and in the other situation adults are forming families.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/st_20100501_5904.php

Posted by: Sam at November 28, 2010 3:40 PM

That's not the same thing sam.

Posted by: ho ho at November 28, 2010 5:24 PM

Not the same as what? Just to be clear, I don't mean for that article to add anything to the discussion about what men find attractive. Various people above argued in support of marrying younger; this article points out that, from a population-wide perspective, marrying young is correlated with divorce, rather than with lasting marriage.

Posted by: Sam at November 28, 2010 6:17 PM

No it doesn't. That's a hit piece trying to claim that 'family values' is baseless and hypocritical because poor red states have higher divorce rates than wealthy blue states. Their relative avg. ages of marriage are incidental, and they're not that far apart ( 23 vs 27 isn't huge gap). The study doesn't even address divorce rates on the basis of age.

Posted by: ho ho at November 28, 2010 6:54 PM

From what I've seen, women can change dramatically from their twenties to thirties. Their personality and appearance in their thirties is more indicative of what they'll be like as they get older.

I agree with that completely ray, and have said it often. It's way more reliable than the "look at their mother to see what they'll turn out like" method. Two of my ex-gfs from my 20s are, shall we say, a little heavier than I would like these days - I'm not criticising them, but I would have been disappointed. The one I met when she was 32 is now 42 and looks better than she did then. Mostly, once women are into their thirties, what you see is what you will continue to get.

It's not just women btw, men are similar. I don't like much what that says about me :)

Posted by: Ltw at November 28, 2010 10:35 PM

In my 20s, I was still recovering from being a kid who had no friends and trying to find my career path. 30- and 40-something me are a much better bet. I'm 46, but I wear sunblock and run around in evening dresses and leather jackets these days (which my boyfriend loves), and I'm mature enough to not lash out at him and or ever treat him like I forgot I love him.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 28, 2010 10:58 PM

"look at their mother to see what they'll turn out like"

I haven't found that very reliable either. It may have some truth for their appearance, but even then it's not a great indicator.

Posted by: ray at November 29, 2010 7:36 AM

"But, realistically, most guys can't date 23 yr olds unless they're in their 20s themselves or fabulously wealthy."

Maybe I'm an outlier, but that has not been my experience at all. I'm 39 with a decent middle-class income and a lifestyle to match. I have zero problems meeting and dating women 10-15 years my junior. I spent most of the long weekend with a gorgeous, pleasant, charming woman of 29, and as mentioned above, have dated women as young as 23.

Posted by: MikeInRealLife at November 29, 2010 8:51 AM

"But, realistically, most guys can't date 23 yr olds unless they're in their 20s themselves or fabulously wealthy."

In my early 20s, I dated guys who were around 35. I like nerds, so they were writers, mathematicians, etc., and two were sound guys on movies. OJ Simpson met me at one point and asked me out, but lucky me, I didn't know who he was (not a sports fan, and wouldn't have been impressed by sports stardom anyway) and found him very dim. When he called (I was staying at my late Advice Lady partner Marlowe's), Marlowe put Otto, her lorakeet, on the phone. Otto actually sounded a lot like both Marlowe and me, save for the fact that I tend not to repeat "Otto, bird!" or "Guten tag!" dozens of times in a row, and neither did Marlowe.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 29, 2010 11:16 AM

Guys can date a lot younger if they keep themselves together, and they're good looking. There are a bunch of guys at my gym who have young girlfriends. It's like one of the other comments pointed out, if you're attractive you're going to have options that other people don't. Your average forty year old man isn't going to have a chance with a younger woman though. It's the same for women. The big advantage that men have is that it's much easier for us to keep ourselves together. Men's bodies don't change to the degree that women's do. We age differently.

Posted by: ray at November 29, 2010 12:12 PM

Actually, because women prioritize power/status, etc., in male partners, men get more desirable as they're older, richer, and more powerful. Powerful women are not more desirable to men -- in fact, they can be less. The powerful woman's gorgeous secretary, however, should do very well.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 29, 2010 12:41 PM

@Mike: Apart from one relationship with a guy 17 years my senior (was in my late 30s at the time) I've always dated close to my own age. So have the majority of my friends.

It's unfair, I know, but while I was in my 20s, I considered women who dated men 10 or 15 years older as women who were looking for "father figures." You know, they were looking for an older man who had the income to treat them well. These women did seem to differentiate themselves from the mainstream once they got into these relationships.

One friend married a psychiatrist about 20 years older and she immediately became a "serious" person, when she always seemed zany and fun-loving before. Another married an older guy (and into a Mormon family) and all of a sudden she got totally serious too. She started dressing like a middle-aged matron and seemed to age 20 years overnight. It's like they had to suddenly start toeing the gravitas line pretty heartily if they wanted to stay with these men. There did seem to be something of a trade-off going on. On the plus side, they did gain materially.

Remember, this was my 20 something perspective, and I recognize myself that it may have been less than perfect at the time.

Posted by: ie at November 29, 2010 12:52 PM

"It's unfair, I know, but while I was in my 20s, I considered women who dated men 10 or 15 years older as women who were looking for 'father figures.'"

I don't think that's unfair. I think it happens with some frequency. However, I think women in their 20s also run into a lot of very immature young men, and get fed up with it. Many times I've heard things like "I want a man, not a boy" from women in their 20s. I've also heard things like, "Well, I'd like to date a guy who could at least afford to take me out for an ice cream cone."

The American-extended-adolescence seems to hit the younger guys pretty hard. A lot of them are still playing first-person shooters with their buddies, watching bad action movies, downing Jagermeister by the quart, and only reading Maxim (usually while on the toilet). By contrast, a guy my age often knows where the art museum is, can competently order a bottle of wine, might know what shows are playing at the theater, has probably read at least a few books this year, can afford tickets to see the local pro sports team, and usually pays at least some attention to current events. These things, more than being a gym rat/exceptionally handsome/fabulously wealthy (I am none of those), help a guy my age attract younger women who don't want to date guys who are still acting like every night's a frat party.

Will any of this lead to a long term relationship? I have no idea, and at this point in my life, I don't especially care since that's not really what I'm looking for. Here again I may be an outlier, but the 20-something women seem far more satisfied with their lives than the late-30s women I've dated (who have usually been through the divorce wringer and seem in a hurry to find the next husband). But of course that's just one man's experience.

Posted by: MikeInRealLife at November 29, 2010 2:27 PM

Amy, all of my female colleagues have graduate degrees and almost all of them are married or are in stable, long term relationships. I think having those degrees, and the jobs that go with them, qualifies them as powerful women.

Most of my male colleagues are married to women with the equivalent level of education. I can't see any of these men trying to pick up the secretaries where I work. It's sounds snobby, I know, but it would be looked at askance, as if the man was "choosing" to be with someone below his station in life.

In my social life, I have friends from all backgrounds and levels of education. Most of those women are married too. And most of them are married to men who earn about as much as they do.

I have a job that qualifies me as powerful and I don't have a problem attracting men. Not one bit. And never have. (Settling down is another matter entirely, but I digress.) But then, Quebec culture is a bit different from the mainstream Anglo culture found on the rest of the continent. That's one of the reasons why, two weeks in a French immersion course, I knew I wasn't going to leave. I felt I could be myself here. That was 20 years ago and I would never move back to an English-speaking part of Canada. The social values outside of Quebec are just too disadvantageous for someone like me.

Posted by: ie at November 29, 2010 4:11 PM

@Mike, not all 20 something men are as boorish as you're making them sound.

In my 20s, I lived in a boho part of a large Canadian city and dated musicians, writers, artists, etc. They were all my age and we were all equally broke. But, I spent that time kicking up my heels and enjoying their company. I look back at that time with great fondness. I learned a lot about art, culture and music from these guys. A lot of the older men I knew (mainly from the temp work I did) seemed too staid by comparison.

Posted by: ie at November 29, 2010 4:19 PM

Amy's basically right about the 'power' factor. I don't care whether a woman is 'powerful'. It does nothing to make her more attractive. Same goes for 'loving yourself' and all the rest. No effect. The pantheon of therapeutic virtues are of no significance to my libido.

Posted by: Lucas Delucas at November 29, 2010 5:07 PM

@lucas: maybe it's because you're not a thinking man?

Posted by: ie at November 29, 2010 6:15 PM

We can't all live inside of your head IE.

Posted by: Lucas Delucas at November 29, 2010 8:00 PM

Many times I've heard things like "I want a man, not a boy" from women in their 20s.

My dad is a man and that model is what I expected (and expect) in men, and I wasn't finding it in guys in my 20s. It isn't about having a father figure -- for me, it's about having somebody who is a man, not a boy. I also find it sexy that somebody's lived a little, and knows how to do life in the ways MikeInRealLife points out above.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 29, 2010 8:02 PM

Same goes for 'loving yourself' and all the rest. No effect. The pantheon of therapeutic virtues are of no significance to my libido.

Right -- but if a woman has little or no self-respect, she's going to be a misery to have a relationship with. And if a man isn't more powerful and making more money than the woman he's with, there's a good chance it will negatively affect the relationship.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 29, 2010 8:05 PM

Speaking as someone who put up with a woman with self esteem issues for many years, self esteem is HUGE!

Many women with low self esteem will turn down horrible roads to fulfill what is missing. Eventually, they'll belittle you, run around on you, be physically and mentally abusive, and, to top it off, they don't clean the house for shit.

Just so you don't mix me up with someone who is bitter, I'm talking about a woman that I deeply love to this day and always will. I'm happy to report that she's doing a lot better these days. No way on earth would I risk another relationship with her though.

Now, when I meet a woman who shows the slightest sign of not being 100% happy with who she is on a basic level, I run like the devil. Self esteem is a very serious matter.

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 30, 2010 1:14 AM

jonQpublic is exactly right.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at November 30, 2010 1:38 AM

@Lucas: you don't need to be in my head to understand that most women aren't turned on by a glaring lack of intellect. I think even Hugh Hefner would agree with me on that point.

Nor do women want someone with an incapacity to appreciate a woman who appreciates herself. No matter what age or income bracket, Lucas, most women do not want a dummy for a partner.

Posted by: ie at November 30, 2010 4:11 AM

Thanks, Amy!

Posted by: jonQpublic at November 30, 2010 4:47 AM

I am obviously not advocating that women should be pathologically insecure.

What is attractive, is a woman who is self possessed and doesn't rely on this sort of vacuous new age horse shit.

You also have to consider that such advice is almost comically narcissistic. So the ideal is that a man should be a selfless provider for a powerful woman who is in love with herself? A man who expected the inverse would be regarded as as abusive.

And what about all of the non-powerful women in the world? The ones who've chosen roles that don't bring them status and power. Should their lack of 'power' make them less attractive to me?

I'm sorry Linda, but a kindergarten teacher just isn't going to cut it for me. You lack material ambition, you're too selfless, and worst of all you have no power.

Posted by: Lucas Delucas at November 30, 2010 11:46 AM

ie wrote: "Mike, not all 20 something men are as boorish as you're making them sound...In my 20s, I lived in a boho part of a large Canadian city and dated musicians, writers, artists, etc."

Oh, I know enough young guys to know they aren't ALL video-gaming Jager-swilling douchebags. But I've certainly talked to a pretty large number of young women who are fed up with those guys and choose to date older men.

I guess guys in their late 30s and early 40s who want to meet young women should come to Phoenix, since the boho scene here is pretty negligible! Anyway, the young artsy/hippie guys who congregate around Arizona State don't necessarily attract a lot of the local young women, who are generally of a somewhat more conservative background.

Posted by: MikeInRealLife at November 30, 2010 11:51 AM

I think it's important to remember that there's a vast difference between who one dates, at various ages, and who they choose to marry. Dating younger guys was fun, and knowing I still could, at 43, was an ego boost and reward for staying fit, but I personally didn't see that age difference being workable long-term....although several of my girlfriends strongly believed those relationships could work, and even pointed out a handful of examples (one of which has already broken up). I'm sure it does work sometimes, and Demi and Ashton are still together, but I knew I'd always be worried that he'd reach the stage I did when I was married to a much older man - finding him boorish and wrinkly, and his friends boorish and wrinkly.

When you're 30 something, and primarily in the company of 50 somethings, there's a difference that's not always noticable between 20s/40s.

Posted by: lovelysoul at December 1, 2010 6:55 AM

Leave a comment

Name

Email Address

URL

Remember personal info?

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)

Is water wet or dry? (required):