Single life as a guy...

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 12:59am

My uncle was nearly 49 when he first became a father (his wife was 40). What's so insulting about saying men have plenty of time?
My brother was about to turn 39.
The opportunity has not passed a man in his mid 30s.

Emme · 12-10-2014 1:03am

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

My uncle was nearly 49 when he first became a father (his wife was 40). What's so insulting about saying men have plenty of time?
My brother was about to turn 39.
The opportunity has not passed a man in his mid 30s.

Indeed. It's not uncommon for men in their 50s to start families with women in their 30s. A man of 36 is in a much better position when it comes to dating than a woman of 36 and the main reason for this is the difference in their respective biological clocks.

fnietzsche · 12-10-2014 1:34am

LordNorbury wrote: »

Hi folks, just thought I'd start this thread, I'm a guy in my mid 30's and single, it occurred to me to start a general discussion on single life for guys in their 20's and 30's (and upwards!)... I'm single a few years now, after a few really long term relationships, was never married and never had kids.

I don't want this to be a thread on internet dating or how to pull women as a single guy, more about the pro's and the con's of single life, the best and the worst of it, aspirations for the future, maybe regrets about the past, what you do that is important to you to have and to enjoy your life, that is generally configured very differently from many people around you, (who at this age are generally settled down with a partner and kids)...

Just interested in generating some discussion on the subject, as your man on Star Trek says, "engage!"...

for what its worth heres one opinion. if i could rip whatever need or attraction i have for women out of me i would. it is an encumbrance to need them in the first place. men and women are so different in mindset as to be a different species. we dont get on seem to constantly rub off one another constantly and tbh never seem to actually get along. time and again its back and forth fighting seems to be part of the course for married or ltr cuples. even though intimate contact was forthcoming in several relationships, i have dumped more girls then i care to remember simple because they were wrecking my head. what i have learned is this i cant live with them i cant live without them. this leves me with the lest worst option casual encounters or escorts. tbh i think in the long run i am going to find work as far away as possible from human contact simply to be away from them. if a man can cow tow to a woman and put up with the differances and her complex needs then fair play i cant.

12-10-2014 10:12am

LordNorbury wrote: »

I kind of asked in the full knowledge that this was body clock related. The biggest urban myth I think that is out there these days, is that single men are somehow operating under a different set of constraints than a single woman would be at the same age. That is an urban myth that simply isn't true I think. I can't count at this stage now many times I have had it said to me in recent years, "sure you're grand, you can have kids with a 32 year old when you're 50 or 60!"...

It is seriously insulting I think to say that to a guy these days. Just think about the silliness of it for a second. When is the last time you saw a 60 year old guy dating a 30 year old or a 20 something year old???

eh .....Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, Sean Penn and most recently George Clooney - all men in their 50's and older who are married to women in their 30's (Penn is not married to his woman yet).
I think you need to lighten up a bit. My dad married at 38 and had 8 children - my mum was only 21 at the time!! A 70 year old man came into where I work last week with his 15 year old son.
I truly get the anxiety women of 35+ feel - its a huge pressure if you want kids. It has to come into a conversation early enough on when dating a guy whether he wants kids and a LTR. Which has men running for the hills........!;)

smurgen · 12-10-2014 10:16am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

[/B]

eh .....Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, Sean Penn and most recently George Clooney - all men in their 50's and older who are married to women in their 30's (Penn is not married to his woman yet).
I think you need to lighten up a bit. My dad married at 38 and had 8 children - my mum was only 21 at the time!! A 70 year old man came into where I work last week with his 15 year old son.
I truly get the anxiety women of 35+ feel - its a huge pressure if you want kids. It has to come into a conversation early enough on when dating a guy whether he wants kids and a LTR. Which has men running for the hills........!;)

We're normal men,not movie stars.having kids is only part of the issue.finding someone relatively early on that you can share your experiences and grow into a proper couple is the ideal situation,well for me anyway.I've never been attracted to women younger that me personality wise.I'm 26 and the difference imo between myself and the average 20 year old seems a bridge too far.

ancapailldorcha · 12-10-2014 10:18am

Deleted User wrote: »

[/B]eh .....Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, Sean Penn and most recently George Clooney - all men in their 50's and older who are married to women in their 30's (Penn is not married to his woman yet).
I think you need to lighten up a bit. My dad married at 38 and had 8 children - my mum was only 21 at the time!! A 70 year old man came into where I work last week with his 15 year old son.
I truly get the anxiety women of 35+ feel - its a huge pressure if you want kids. It has to come into a conversation early enough on when dating a guy whether he wants kids and a LTR. Which has men running for the hills........!;)

They're hardly average men in fairness.

Yes, we can father children until a ripe old age, perhaps even until we die but that means nothing if we can't attract a woman who'll be willing to do most of the work unless men in their 40s and above are more energetic than I'm giving them credit for.

We only "run for the hills" when it's sprung upon us early in a relationship which isn't fair on either party. A lot of guys would love to start a family but we need to feel secure first as the consequences of things going wrong are much worse for us. Women have that clock to contend with which adds pressure. I won't elaborate further as I'd just be retreading old ground.

kiffer · 12-10-2014 10:43am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

[/B]

eh .....Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, Sean Penn and most recently George Clooney - all men in their 50's and older who are married to women in their 30's (Penn is not married to his woman yet).
I think you need to lighten up a bit. My dad married at 38 and had 8 children - my mum was only 21 at the time!! A 70 year old man came into where I work last week with his 15 year old son.
I truly get the anxiety women of 35+ feel - its a huge pressure if you want kids. It has to come into a conversation early enough on when dating a guy whether he wants kids and a LTR. Which has men running for the hills........!;)

Well... yeah.
OK.
So if you're ok with a partner who is young enough to be your child having your child then that's ok.
I'm sure when I'm old maybe I'll be rich enough to attract a woman with whom to have kids... great.
Because it's not like I'm going to get physically more handsome.
Reminds me of boys being told, well you might be having a hard time now but when you are thirty and have a great job you'll be fighting them off with a stick...
except now it's you're in your 30's but there's no pressure sure you can technically wait another 40 years... um thanks.
I'd rather have the kids sooner while my knees are still in good shape and I can run after them.
Good lord, imagine being 70 and still having to deal with a 15 year old? And then you're 80 when they are 20, probably dead before they finish college and make a life for themselves?
Great.

Seriously? · 12-10-2014 10:44am

Judging by the cso statistics mid-thirties is certainly not a case of the possibility having passed you by.

http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/birthsdeathsandmarriages/averageageofmotherclassifiedbymaritalstatus/

With an average mothers age of 33.6 (in marriage) then mid-thirties is certainly not past it for a guy if age is the only factor.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 10:51am

kiffer wrote: »

Well... yeah.
OK.
So if you're ok with a partner who is young enough to be your child having your child then that's ok.
I'm sure when I'm old maybe I'll be rich enough to attract a woman with whom to have kids... great.
Because it's not like I'm going to get physically more handsome.
Reminds me of boys being told, well you might be having a hard time now but when you are thirty and have a great job you'll be fighting them off with a stick...
except now it's you're in your 30's but there's no pressure sure you can technically wait another 40 years... um thanks.
I'd rather have the kids sooner while my knees are still in good shape and I can run after them.
Good lord, imagine being 70 and still having to deal with a 15 year old? And then you're 80 when they are 20, probably dead before they finish college and make a life for themselves?
Great.

It would be more ideal not to have a child too late for sure, but people are just responding to a post where it looked as if the writer thought he could no longer father children past his mid 30s.

Seriously? · 12-10-2014 11:25am

Happened upon this opinion (read more light-hearted) piece, but relevant to the topic in hand.

It's another perspective on the whole age thing when it comes to guys and gals.

http://time.com/3422046/30-is-the-new-50/

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 11:57am

Seriously? wrote: »

Happened upon this opinion (read more light-hearted) piece, but relevant to the topic in hand.

It's another perspective on the whole age thing when it comes to guys and gals.

http://time.com/3422046/30-is-the-new-50/

That woman is a bit self pitying IMO.

LordNorbury · 12-10-2014 12:13pm

I couldn't disagree more on the kids thing. People tend to date in or around the same age as themselves.

I think it is wrong to say that men don't worry about the following:

(1) Children being born with potentially serious and well known health issues due to the mother being over 35. Statistically you are a lot more exposed to having a child with chromosomal defects once you are over 35. For anyone dating in their 30's, even their early 30's, assuming you'd need to be in a proper relationship for 2-3 years before even thinking of kids, this puts you right up against that risk.

(2) There is also the worry in this day & age about income, raising a child is an expensive business and you can go from being relatively comfortable to pretty much homeless in this country now in the space of 3 months and that's just being single. I would not consider this country a safe, suitable or financially secure enough place to start a family. Wages are too low, housing is too scarce, cost of living (especially costs in relation to the rearing children, for example crèche costs), are too high, jobs are typically not very secure.

While I would have truly loved to have had kids, I accept nearly in entirety that it has pretty much passed me by and I'd rather accept that as it is, than be going through life carrying a load of "what if's" and wondering is every girl I go on a date with, could be the future mother of my unborn kids.

Yeah it could all change in the morning if I met Mrs. Right, well settled thoughts such as above could be easily swept aside, highly unlikely though in my opinion & more importantly, in my recent experience when it comes to dating.

Emme · 12-10-2014 1:18pm

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

That woman is a bit self pitying IMO.

Perhaps, but she wants a LTR where she can settle down and have children. I don't know where she lives but it seems that in her circles this has passed her by. I don't blame her for being frustrated and sad. I hope all goes well for Alex the Architect but there's a good chance he might end up settling for Anouk the 23 year old. Contraception isn't always foolproof and women in their early 20s are very fertile. They are also determined not to make the mistakes made by older woman - at any cost.

Feminism started out with the noble aim of equality in all things for men and women. Women have made some gains such as equal pay and a better chance to climb the career ladder but the dice is still loaded against us. The career ladder evolved with men's biology and we cannot keep up with that. After years of study and hard slog a man or woman may be just getting started in their careers at 28 or 30. At this age a woman is on a biological slippery slope. A man may feel he is not established enough in his career and may choose to wait until 38 or 40 to start a family even though he would start a family at 30 in an ideal world. Even so he may still be able to play football with his children at 60 and there are plenty of younger women to choose from.

Younger women have wised up to biological reality very fast and don't want to make the same mistakes as women in the generation before them. They don't want to wind up single at 40 with no options or single at 36 with a ticking biological clock and very few options. That's why today's 23 year olds are happy to date 40 year olds.

Divorce is relatively new to Ireland. 20 years ago or more many men who were over 35 and single may have been a bit odd and not very dateable. They chased 23 year olds but the 23 year olds ran away screaming! Divorce changed all this and more people started coming onto the dating market at a mature age. If a divorced man starts a new relationship it is often with a significantly younger woman. Divorce has also made people cagey about settling down so men are waiting longer to marry and when they do a younger woman is a better option if they want to start a family. Go onto any dating site or any bar at the weekend and you will see the fallout from this - dozens of women in their late 30s and upwards who have never been married. These women are unlikely to find someone their own age who wants a long term relationship (with them). If they do find someone he is likely to be a good bit older and in some cases these women will be taking on the role of provider/carer as opposed to partner/lover. This is no mean feat in an era when jobs are increasingly pressurised and people are expected to work unpaid overtime regardless of family demands.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 1:34pm

Bit defeatist though to think it's all over at 30. I know countless women who didn't meet their partner/husband until after 30 and have families.
It seems to be the norm nowadays to get married in early to mid 30s and then start a family.

I'd understand her concern if she was, say, 36/7 yes, absolutely - my friend is 36, single (had three relationships) and longing for a baby, and it's a horrible place for her to be and she gets very very sad about it.
But 30... no way all is not lost. It never felt like it when we were 30 either.

beks101 · 12-10-2014 1:55pm

Or maybe that guy was 'just not that into her'?

The intensity of her tone in that article was a bit crazy. If it is reflective of her demeanor in real life, I'm not surprised the guy disappeared.

It's absolutely wise and respectable to know what you want and not be afraid of being vocal about that in your dating life, but to get into that stuff after four dates? How much can you really know about someone at that stage? It sounds like this woman's desire for marriage and babies and instant commitment preceded her desire to feel out this guy and their actual compatibility and to determine his suitability to fulfill that role in her life. Which I'd imagine for a guy who's simply trying to get to know a woman is as blatantly obvious as a slap in the face and must be a bit off-putting.

I think that's the wholly inconvenient dichotomy about dating, particularly as you get older. On the one hand, be expressive and communicative, don't get led down the garden path and end up wasting your time. On the other hand, go too hard and even the most genuinely interested guy will do a legger.

LordNorbury · 12-10-2014 3:54pm

Emme wrote: »

Feminism started out with the noble aim of equality in all things for men and women. Women have made some gains such as equal pay and a better chance to climb the career ladder but the dice is still loaded against us.

Couldn't disagree more, I'm in my mid 30's, single guy, and importantly, I have no kids. A woman in the same situation as myself has nothing loaded against her.

The problem you say arises, only presents itself because a guy in my situation can just accept that he has not met someone and will not be having a family. Whereas a woman in my situation, especially if she is in a relationship, will most likely insist that she is entitled to have children. This is where I think this whole debate on feminism and equal rights for men & women, gets very watery.

Women seem to demand as a right, that equality takes total account of their desire to have children. As a guy, I don't go around making those damands of society, I don't have kids, that's the way it is, no problem. A woman in my situation I think is highly unlikely to see it the same way...

kiffer · 12-10-2014 6:10pm

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

That woman is a bit self pitying IMO.

Yeah I mean she could just find one of those technically fertile at 70 men and have and have kids with him... if the men in their 40s that she is interested in she are chasing women in their 20s then she just has to expand her search to include the 50-70 bracket.
It'll be grand sure.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 7:48pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

Couldn't disagree more, I'm in my mid 30's, single guy, and importantly, I have no kids. A woman in the same situation as myself has nothing loaded against her.

"Nothing"? Other than declining fertility like.

The problem you say arises, only presents itself because a guy in my situation can just accept that he has not met someone and will not be having a family. Whereas a woman in my situation, especially if she is in a relationship, will most likely insist that she is entitled to have children.

I don't understand. So a woman who's single (why are you bringing women in a relationship into this? I thought you were talking about women in your situation, i.e. single? Of course a woman in a relationship is going to be at more of an advantage if she wants children) and in her mid 30s and really wants children... is in a better situation than a man in his mid 30s who's single and wants children? Clearly she isn't, biologically alone.
The thing of accepting you won't meet someone and won't have a family... doesn't mean every man in your situation does (and anyway, you fallaciously keep acting as if you can't physically have children after your mid 30s, which is... self defeating to say the least). What's worse again is having to accept that you literally can't have children, no matter who you meet.

Women seem to demand as a right, that equality takes total account of their desire to have children. As a guy, I don't go around making those damands of society, I don't have kids, that's the way it is, no problem. A woman in my situation I think is highly unlikely to see it the same way...

How can a woman demand children from "society"?
Being able to demand, doesn't mean it will happen. My friend is 36, relationship just finished, she is longing to start a family - and? What is this demanding of society she can do to get that baby for herself? She needs a partner... or, worst case scenario, a sperm donor. And that doesn't come cheap.

kiffer wrote: »

Yeah I mean she could just find one of those technically fertile at 70 men and have and have kids with him... if the men in their 40s that she is interested in she are chasing women in their 20s then she just has to expand her search to include the 50-70 bracket.
It'll be grand sure.

Such hostility. 30 is too early to be acting as if you're being forgotten about and left on the shelf. Buying into it could just turn it into a self fulfilling prophecy too. 70 is a bit of an extreme example for a man's age too don't you think? As I said, most women I know met their long-term partner/husband after 30.
The thing about women in their early 20s going for men in their 40s... first I've heard of it.

AndreaCollins · 12-10-2014 8:50pm

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

The thing about women in their early 20s going for men in their 40s... first I've heard of it.

A lot of men in their 40s who have money and a good lifestyle are very attractive to some younger women. I wonder if well off single men in their 40s would prefer girls in their early 20s or girls in their late 30s/early 40s? I think it would be the former. I do agree that by and large most women in their 20s don't go for guys in their 40s though.

Piliger · 12-10-2014 9:26pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They're hardly average men in fairness.

Yes, we can father children until a ripe old age, perhaps even until we die but that means nothing if we can't attract a woman who'll be willing to do most of the work unless men in their 40s and above are more energetic than I'm giving them credit for.

I can confirm that they are ...

But on the main point yes you are right. Men are physically capable of fathering until they are in their 70's (Look at Larry King) but it is generally dependent on their wealth and status. A normal middle class man over 50 is going to find it extremely unlikely, though not impossible, to find a women of child bearing age which I would take as being sub 38 or so.

We only "run for the hills" when it's sprung upon us early in a relationship which isn't fair on either party. A lot of guys would love to start a family but we need to feel secure first as the consequences of things going wrong are much worse for us. Women have that clock to contend with which adds pressure. I won't elaborate further as I'd just be retreading old ground.

In other words we men have our own challenges and worries and anxieties and limitations. They are not identical to women's. They are different. But many of us are sick to death of the appalling success the feminist movement has had in persuading the establishment and the media that women's concerns are the only ones that matter.

the evasion_kid · 12-10-2014 9:53pm

I work with a few guys mid to
LAte thirties who just recently had kids they also say to me they wish they did it sooner as there feeling the age and after a hard days work to go home to a child that constantly be wants to be played with is very draining,

Potatoeman · 12-10-2014 10:52pm

Seriously? wrote: »

Happened upon this opinion (read more light-hearted) piece, but relevant to the topic in hand.

It's another perspective on the whole age thing when it comes to guys and gals.

http://time.com/3422046/30-is-the-new-50/

I can't imagine the chance of a transcript of your breakup or even your relationship appearing on Time's website being a big selling point.

BonsaiKitten · 12-10-2014 11:49pm

Emme wrote: »

Younger women have wised up to biological reality very fast and don't want to make the same mistakes as women in the generation before them. They don't want to wind up single at 40 with no options or single at 36 with a ticking biological clock and very few options. That's why today's 23 year olds are happy to date 40 year olds.

What? Just what?
What 23 year olds do you know? I'm honestly curious about this. I'm 21, most of my friends would be my age or a year older and I can't think of any one of them who'd date a 40 year old. We want guys our own age, from our own generation! Unless I'm secretly surrounded by sugar babies or something.
I'm sure there's some out there, but really, I'm baffled by that.

George Clooney etc don't count, they're sexy famous millionaires - something the average 40 year old is not.

Galwayguy35 · 13-10-2014 12:19am

Men can have kids into old age but it's not ideal, my old man was 57 when I was born and a pensioner when I was 9, I would like kids myself but I think if it doesn't happen in the next 5 years I will just put it out of my mind.

AndreaCollins · 13-10-2014 12:24am

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

What? Just what?
What 23 year olds do you know? I'm honestly curious about this. I'm 21, most of my friends would be my age or a year older and I can't think of any one of them who'd date a 40 year old.

Very true. Girls who say looks don't matter should consider how they would feel if an ugly 40 year old guy asked them out.

stateofflux · 13-10-2014 12:33am

the evasion_kid wrote: »

I work with a few guys mid to
LAte thirties who just recently had kids they also say to me they wish they did it sooner as there feeling the age and after a hard days work to go home to a child that constantly be wants to be played with is very draining,

40's maybe. but 30's? they may need to lay off the kit-kat drawer in work

BonsaiKitten · 13-10-2014 12:35am

AndreaCollins wrote: »

Very true. Girls who say looks don't matter should consider how they would feel if an ugly 40 year old guy asked them out.

Well, yes it can be a looks thing of course.
But it's a whole other stage in life too! Many 40 year olds - their friends will probablybe married or have kids. The guy themselves could have kids. They've mortgages and serious careers and are probably not as up for going out during the week or predrinking with a bunch of hyper students etc etc...I mean really.
How in any way is that attractive for a 23 year old?

AndreaCollins · 13-10-2014 1:13am

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

Well, yes it can be a looks thing of course.
But it's a whole other stage in life too! Many 40 year olds - their friends will probablybe married or have kids. The guy themselves could have kids. They've mortgages and serious careers and are probably not as up for going out during the week or predrinking with a bunch of hyper students etc etc...I mean really.
How in any way is that attractive for a 23 year old?

Even if the 40 year old has no kids, no mortgage or serious career and likes going out during the week for a few drinks, he is still not attractive to girls your age due to his looks. His looks create a negative halo effect (failo effect). I myself wouldn't go near a guy that age and neither would any of my friends. Well some would if he had money.

stateofflux · 13-10-2014 1:29am

AndreaCollins wrote: »

Even if the 40 year old has no kids, no mortgage or serious career and likes going out during the week for a few drinks, he is still not attractive to girls your age due to his looks. His looks create a negative halo effect (failo effect). I myself wouldn't go near a guy that age and neither would any of my friends. Well some would if he had money.

plenty of Irish girls in their twenties prefer older guys. im guessing it would have a lot to do with maturity and knowing what one wants

kiffer · 13-10-2014 1:59am

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Such hostility. 30 is too early to be acting as if you're being forgotten about and left on the shelf. Buying into it could just turn it into a self fulfilling prophecy too. 70 is a bit of an extreme example for a man's age too don't you think? As I said, most women I know met their long-term partner/husband after 30.
The thing about women in their early 20s going for men in their 40s... first I've heard of it.

What hostility? I think perhaps you are projecting a little

or perhaps my usage of the English language is in elegant. I mean after all I was agreeing with you about that author.
70* is an extreme example, I agree, but it wasn't me who originally raised the "ah sure men can have kids till 70 so no/less pressure" idea.
As has been pointed out men have more time to have kids and so clearly women have a larger choice of partners.
If they can't find a man in their own age bracket they can open up the field to a larger selection of men... I don't see what objection to that there can be.

As for women in their 20s chasing men in their 40s... no I don't think that's all that common, but men in their 40s chasing women in their 20s... that is certainly a thing.

*also 70 was the end of a range that I went on to give, 50-70. You can take the end number as the suggested number but that seems a little disingenuous.
If she is having trouble finding a partner in her desired age range with whom to have children she can branch out to the aforementioned 50-70 age bracket.
70 is a bit extreme but it's the end of the bracket I gave, if you think it's a bit extreme then is 65 not extreme? 60?
Where do you place the line so a man is not so old as to be extreme for a woman who is close to the end of her reproductive years? Because the argument that men don't have the time pressure that women do is based off the "men can have kids till 70" thing... but if they're so old that it is extreme that a woman in count down mode wouldn't really consider them out side of unusual circumstances then that's not really time that is available to men...

So yeah, men definitely have more time then women...
but not as much more time as people keep saying.
And women have more options for a father then men have for a mother to their children... but not in a particularly desirable way... it's pretty much a wash as far as I'm concerned.

I'm tired now, waffling and repeating myself, too tired to read over my post, so forgive the repetition, please.

13-10-2014 7:33am

kiffer wrote: »

What hostility? I think perhaps you are projecting a little or perhaps my usage of the English language is in elegant. I mean after all I was agreeing with you about that author.
70* is an extreme example, I agree, but it wasn't me who originally raised the "ah sure men can have kids till 70 so no/less pressure" idea.
As has been pointed out men have more time to have kids and so clearly women have a larger choice of partners.
If they can't find a man in their own age bracket they can open up the field to a larger selection of men... I don't see what objection to that there can be.
As for women in their 20s chasing men in their 40s... no I don't think that's all that common, but men in their 40s chasing women in their 20s... that is certainly a thing.

*also 70 was the end of a range that I went on to give, 50-70. You can take the end number as the suggested number but that seems a little disingenuous.
If she is having trouble finding a partner in her desired age range with whom to have children she can branch out to the aforementioned 50-70 age bracket.
70 is a bit extreme but it's the end of the bracket I gave, if you think it's a bit extreme then is 65 not extreme? 60?
Where do you place the line so a man is not so old as to be extreme for a woman who is close to the end of her reproductive years? Because the argument that men don't have the time pressure that women do is based off the "men can have kids till 70" thing... but if they're so old that it is extreme that a woman in count down mode wouldn't really consider them out side of unusual circumstances then that's not really time that is available to men...

So yeah, men definitely have more time then women...
but not as much more time as people keep saying.
And women have more options for a father then men have for a mother to their children... but not in a particularly desirable way... it's pretty much a wash as far as I'm concerned.

I'm tired now, waffling and repeating myself, too tired to read over my post, so forgive the repetition, please.

whew! no wonder you're tired :P........... (but good points!)

13-10-2014 7:45am

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

What? Just what?
What 23 year olds do you know? I'm honestly curious about this. I'm 21, most of my friends would be my age or a year older and I can't think of any one of them who'd date a 40 year old. We want guys our own age, from our own generation! Unless I'm secretly surrounded by sugar babies or something.
I'm sure there's some out there, but really, I'm baffled by that.

George Clooney etc don't count, they're sexy famous millionaires - something the average 40 year old is not.

i agree with you. My daughter is 23 and was dating a guy of 35 with a child. She is just out of college last year and the last thing she wanted was someone who had to child mind every weekend instead of going out. Maybe thats not the case with all separated guys but it was with him so it ended after 2 months. She's not ready to think about houses, mortgages, kids. The last thing she wanted was to sit in babysitting with him -even though she liked him. So thats it from another perspective. Timing is everything.

Potatoeman · 13-10-2014 8:15am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

i agree with you. My daughter is 23 and was dating a guy of 35 with a child. She is just out of college last year and the last thing she wanted was someone who had to child mind every weekend instead of going out. Maybe thats not the case with all separated guys but it was with him so it ended after 2 months. She's not ready to think about houses, mortgages, kids. The last thing she wanted was to sit in babysitting with him -even though she liked him. So thats it from another perspective. Timing is everything.

Although you argee with the poster you kind of undermine their point as she did date him.

LordNorbury · 13-10-2014 11:40am

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

How can a woman demand children from "society"?
Being able to demand, doesn't mean it will happen. My friend is 36, relationship just finished, she is longing to start a family - and? What is this demanding of society she can do to get that baby for herself? She needs a partner... or, worst case scenario, a sperm donor. And that doesn't come cheap.

I'm not great with multi-quote messages so I'm going to reply generally to the points you've raised...

First of all, it is a total fallacy to keep insisting that single men without kids who are my age (mid 30's) and older, are going around thinking that it's grand because we can technically father children up until we are 90. Women of childbearing age (women in their 20's and 30's), simply do not end up or entertain men in their 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's. Maybe an attractive and successful enough guy who is in his mid 40's can end up with a women who is mid-late 30's, but even this would be rare enough these days I think, as you would be dealing with a 10 year age gap which is not all that common to see these days.

In relation to your quote that I've highlighted above, she isn't "demanding a child from society", what I meant is that she is demanding that her "right" to have children, be accommodated by society and failure of society to protect and uphold that "right" for her, is perceived as gender discrimination. I've made the point that I don't believe that men or women have some sort of absolute right to have children. In law of course they do, but in practice, they don't. I'd love to have kids, I don't, and thankfully I have the grace to accept that as being where I find myself today.

As you've pointed out above as is the case with your friend, her situation and mine are probably identical, same age, both single, both would ideally love to have kids, but that is where the similarities end. I accept that I most probably won't be having kids, I've totally adjusted to that reality, whereas your friend appears to be wholly driven to have children, notwithstanding the fact that she is a single woman. As you've described it above, it sounds like her highest priority is to have children, either through a partner or sperm donor.

I'm not having a go at your friend here, on some level I understand her stronger maternal urge to have kids, (even though I know some of men who have a stronger urge than women to have kids), but there is a big difference here in our perception of the future, your friend doesn't seem to be able to see a future without kids, I have no issue seeing my life without kids. Technically I could travel to India as a single guy and father a child through surrogacy, but this is my point, when is the last time you heard of a guy doing that? The use of sperm donation for pregnancy by single women in their mid-late 30's though is becoming an increasingly regular phenomenon, I personally know of three women who have become mothers via sperm donation.

ZeroThreat · 13-10-2014 12:41pm

Well despite what I said earlier in the thread, height doesn't seem to be a handicap to some people

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/11154107/Dwarf-stripper-gets-bride-pregnant-on-her-hen-night.html

Wibbs · 13-10-2014 1:59pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

Maybe an attractive and successful enough guy who is in his mid 40's can end up with a women who is mid-late 30's, but even this would be rare enough these days I think, as you would be dealing with a 10 year age gap which is not all that common to see these days

I dunno LN, if anything I'd say it's more common to see age gap relationships these days(compared to when I was in my 20's back in the 90's), or at least that's been my experience. People's and society's "rules" have become much more relaxed I reckon and not just with age gaps. Going both ways gender wise too. I can think of a few relationships and even marriages where the women are older than the men, up to ten years older. That was pretty rare to see back in the day(I never did, beyond "friends with benefits" arrangements). OK ten year age gaps aren't the "norm" but they're commoner than they were. Of the men I know who aren't married but dating in their 40's I'd reckon around a half of them are or have gone out with women in their 30's, down to the early 30's too and one mate of mine in his late 40's has been in a serious relationship with a woman in her late 20's for over a year. Some of these guys are successful and some are good looking, but some aren't.

LordNorbury · 13-10-2014 2:32pm

Wibbs wrote: »

I dunno LN, if anything I'd say it's more common to see age gap relationships these days(compared to when I was in my 20's back in the 90's), or at least that's been my experience. People's and society's "rules" have become much more relaxed I reckon and not just with age gaps. Going both ways gender wise too. I can think of a few relationships and even marriages where the women are older than the men, up to ten years older. That was pretty rare to see back in the day(I never did, beyond "friends with benefits" arrangements). OK ten year age gaps aren't the "norm" but they're commoner than they were. Of the men I know who aren't married but dating in their 40's I'd reckon around a half of them are or have gone out with women in their 30's, down to the early 30's too and one mate of mine in his late 40's has been in a serious relationship with a woman in her late 20's for over a year. Some of these guys are successful and some are good looking, but some aren't.

I do hear ye there Wibbs, but if you were to take a single guy at aged 50, I think it's fair to say that these guys would be very lucky to end up with a girl in her 20's or 30's these days. Yeah you'll get the odd 23 year old who is into older men and will make a point of seeking out some guy old enough to be her father, but the point I think is still valid, that this myth that is out there that men are alright because we can technically still father a child in our 60's, 70's or 80's, I think that myth needs to be busted, because in reality I think it only holds true up until your mid-late 40's if you are lucky, as you've pointed out. Once you go over 50, I think as far as kids are concerned, a guy is pretty much as redundant as a woman is in that department. Yes of course we can still produce healthy sperm but partnering with someone of child bearing age I think is highly unlikely once you hit the 50's...

ancapailldorcha · 13-10-2014 2:52pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

I do hear ye there Wibbs, but if you were to take a single guy at aged 50, I think it's fair to say that these guys would be very lucky to end up with a girl in her 20's or 30's these days. Yeah you'll get the odd 23 year old who is into older men and will make a point of seeking out some guy old enough to be her father, but the point I think is still valid, that this myth that is out there that men are alright because we can technically still father a child in our 60's, 70's or 80's, I think that myth needs to be busted, because in reality I think it only holds true up until your mid-late 40's if you are lucky, as you've pointed out. Once you go over 50, I think as far as kids are concerned, a guy is pretty much as redundant as a woman is in that department. Yes of course we can still produce healthy sperm but partnering with someone of child bearing age I think is highly unlikely once you hit the 50's...

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a myth, it's more of an unlikely event. People focus on the fact that it's biologically possible rather than the fact that it's highly improbably barring unusual circumstances.

Emme · 13-10-2014 2:54pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

I do hear ye there Wibbs, but if you were to take a single guy at aged 50, I think it's fair to say that these guys would be very lucky to end up with a girl in her 20's or 30's these days. Yeah you'll get the odd 23 year old who is into older men and will make a point of seeking out some guy old enough to be her father, but the point I think is still valid, that this myth that is out there that men are alright because we can technically still father a child in our 60's, 70's or 80's, I think that myth needs to be busted, because in reality I think it only holds true up until your mid-late 40's if you are lucky, as you've pointed out. Once you go over 50, I think as far as kids are concerned, a guy is pretty much as redundant as a woman is in that department. Yes of course we can still produce healthy sperm but partnering with someone of child bearing age I think is highly unlikely once you hit the 50's...

Women in Dublin and other urban centres may prefer to have children with men under 50 but men over 50 in rural Ireland don't seem to have any problem finding women to start families with. Men who wouldn't get a second glance in Dublin are beating women off with a sh! tty stick in the country!

These are normal men - not especially rich or good looking but they would have steady jobs/businesses and homes of their own which would make them a catch in rural Ireland. The typical scenario would be a man in his early to mid 50s with a woman in her 30s. Matches between men in their 40s and women in their 20s are common too. I think emigration has a lot to do with it. In rural families boys are more likely to emigrate than girls. Apparently the statistic is 3 boys emigrating for every 2 girls. That leaves a shortage of men in their 20s and early 30s in rural Ireland.

LordNorbury · 13-10-2014 3:08pm

Emme wrote: »

Women in Dublin and other urban centres may prefer to have children with men under 50 but men over 50 in rural Ireland don't seem to have any problem finding women to start families with. Men who wouldn't get a second glance in Dublin are beating women off with a sh! tty stick in the country!

Of course they don't, because a lot of them have farms! I have friends & extended family living in the rural West of Ireland and it never ceases to amaze me how important road frontage is when it comes to picking a guy for a relationship, something that has always been completely & totally alien to me as a Dublin guy. And these girls are not even ashamed to say that this is the case, there is an openly stated expectation that any guy they consider for a relationship, with a view to settling down, will either have land or will eventually inherit land. It is an obsession I think when I listen to it.

PucaMama · 13-10-2014 4:52pm

Emme wrote: »

Women in Dublin and other urban centres may prefer to have children with men under 50 but men over 50 in rural Ireland don't seem to have any problem finding women to start families with. Men who wouldn't get a second glance in Dublin are beating women off with a sh! tty stick in the country!

These are normal men - not especially rich or good looking but they would have steady jobs/businesses and homes of their own which would make them a catch in rural Ireland. The typical scenario would be a man in his early to mid 50s with a woman in her 30s. Matches between men in their 40s and women in their 20s are common too. I think emigration has a lot to do with it. In rural families boys are more likely to emigrate than girls. Apparently the statistic is 3 boys emigrating for every 2 girls. That leaves a shortage of men in their 20s and early 30s in rural Ireland.

I think its less to do with emigration and more the fact that men in Ireland are encouraged not to settle down in their 20s or 30s. Whereas women don't really have the chance to wait till they are 40 to settle down. Men in Ireland in my experience are encouraged to enjoy themselves go do whatever they want which I think leads to many men in their late 20s still in teenager mode. Now there's plenty of women like that too. Enough to make it strange that someone might want to settle in their 20s. But 30 seems the ok point.

Galwayguy35 · 13-10-2014 5:16pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

Of course they don't, because a lot of them have farms! I have friends & extended family living in the rural West of Ireland and it never ceases to amaze me how important road frontage is when it comes to picking a guy for a relationship, something that has always been completely & totally alien to me as a Dublin guy. And these girls are not even ashamed to say that this is the case, there is an openly stated expectation that any guy they consider for a relationship, with a view to settling down, will either have land or will eventually inherit land. It is an obsession I think when I listen to it.

Not seeing that myself, and I live in the west of Ireland.

fits · 13-10-2014 5:28pm

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Not seeing that myself, and I live in the west of Ireland.

neither do I annd from a rural area also.

jackofalltrades · 13-10-2014 8:51pm

PucaMama wrote: »

I think its less to do with emigration and more the fact that men in Ireland are encouraged not to settle down in their 20s or 30s. Whereas women don't really have the chance to wait till they are 40 to settle down. Men in Ireland in my experience are encouraged to enjoy themselves go do whatever they want which I think leads to many men in their late 20s still in teenager mode. Now there's plenty of women like that too. Enough to make it strange that someone might want to settle in their 20s. But 30 seems the ok point.

Who/what is encouraging men to not settle down in their 20s/30s?

I ask because virtually all my male friends and family members are/were looking to settle down from the late 20s onwards.

Potatoeman · 13-10-2014 10:54pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

Of course they don't, because a lot of them have farms! I have friends & extended family living in the rural West of Ireland and it never ceases to amaze me how important road frontage is when it comes to picking a guy for a relationship, something that has always been completely & totally alien to me as a Dublin guy. And these girls are not even ashamed to say that this is the case, there is an openly stated expectation that any guy they consider for a relationship, with a view to settling down, will either have land or will eventually inherit land. It is an obsession I think when I listen to it.

It happens in the city too. The old 'do you own or are you renting?' question.

Shakespeare's Sister · 13-10-2014 11:47pm

LordNorbury wrote: »

First of all, it is a total fallacy to keep insisting that single men without kids who are my age (mid 30's) and older, are going around thinking that it's grand because we can technically father children up until we are 90. Women of childbearing age (women in their 20's and 30's), simply do not end up or entertain men in their 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's. Maybe an attractive and successful enough guy who is in his mid 40's can end up with a women who is mid-late 30's, but even this would be rare enough these days I think, as you would be dealing with a 10 year age gap which is not all that common to see these days.

In relation to your quote that I've highlighted above, she isn't "demanding a child from society", what I meant is that she is demanding that her "right" to have children, be accommodated by society and failure of society to protect and uphold that "right" for her, is perceived as gender discrimination. I've made the point that I don't believe that men or women have some sort of absolute right to have children. In law of course they do, but in practice, they don't. I'd love to have kids, I don't, and thankfully I have the grace to accept that as being where I find myself today.

As you've pointed out above as is the case with your friend, her situation and mine are probably identical, same age, both single, both would ideally love to have kids, but that is where the similarities end. I accept that I most probably won't be having kids, I've totally adjusted to that reality, whereas your friend appears to be wholly driven to have children, notwithstanding the fact that she is a single woman. As you've described it above, it sounds like her highest priority is to have children, either through a partner or sperm donor.

I'm not having a go at your friend here, on some level I understand her stronger maternal urge to have kids, (even though I know some of men who have a stronger urge than women to have kids), but there is a big difference here in our perception of the future, your friend doesn't seem to be able to see a future without kids, I have no issue seeing my life without kids. Technically I could travel to India as a single guy and father a child through surrogacy, but this is my point, when is the last time you heard of a guy doing that? The use of sperm donation for pregnancy by single women in their mid-late 30's though is becoming an increasingly regular phenomenon, I personally know of three women who have become mothers via sperm donation.

Ok I'm not saying guys who want kids are grand because they can father kids forever - of course that's no use if they have nobody with whom to pro-create, and obviously the older a man is, the less likely he will be able to get together with a fertile woman.
What I don't understand though is you saying a single woman your age who wants children is in a better position than a single man your age who wants children. Neither is in a great position but from a biological perspective, obviously the woman is in a worse one - I mean there's no contesting that.

There may be more receptiveness to women in their late 30s conceiving via sperm donor, but it costs a lot of money - it's not something a woman can just dive into. Obviously it would be a lot easier if she simply wasn't single.
If a man ends up meeting a woman in the second half of her 30s when he's 45 (and that's happening more and more nowadays) they have a chance of starting a family. A woman who meets her long-term partner when she's 45 has virtually no chance of doing so - well the standard way anyway.

14-10-2014 7:41am

Potatoeman wrote: »

Although you argee with the poster you kind of undermine their point as she did date him.

yeah ..... until she found out the reality of dating a man with kids!
(obviously this was her first experience and it taught her a lot she didnt know before - 2 months was the learning curve)

Potatoeman · 14-10-2014 8:03am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

yeah ..... until she found out the reality of dating a man with kids!
(obviously this was her first experience and it taught her a lot she didnt know before - 2 months was the learning curve)

It was not his age though. It was the fact he had kids. The poster you were agreeing with said her and her friends would not date someone older.

LordNorbury · 14-10-2014 10:19am

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Ok I'm not saying guys who want kids are grand because they can father kids forever - of course that's no use if they have nobody with whom to pro-create, and obviously the older a man is, the less likely he will be able to get together with a fertile woman.
What I don't understand though is you saying a single woman your age who wants children is in a better position than a single man your age who wants children. Neither is in a great position but from a biological perspective, obviously the woman is in a worse one - I mean there's no contesting that.

There may be more receptiveness to women in their late 30s conceiving via sperm donor, but it costs a lot of money - it's not something a woman can just dive into. Obviously it would be a lot easier if she simply wasn't single.
If a man ends up meeting a woman in the second half of her 30s when he's 45 (and that's happening more and more nowadays) they have a chance of starting a family. A woman who meets her long-term partner when she's 45 has virtually no chance of doing so - well the standard way anyway.

Yeah but you've more or less confirmed the point I'm making above. I'm in my mid 30's, no kids as I've said, I've processed that as a fact, accepted it, and moved on with my life as a single person. Me meeting someone today, who based on my own experience would probably be very close in age to me, if I were to consider kids with such a woman, I'd have to put in a few years with her relationship wise, and in my case, this puts me right up against 40. The well known risks involved, along with a load of other factors such as costs, etc, have left me in a position where I basically don't want to have kids in the future, although on a emotional level it is something that I do wish had panned out very differently as I am actually great with kids.

But the difference in perception that I'm referring to I think is obvious within your last post, which is that it appears to me, and I could be wrong here, that what I have gently accepted as a fact and as a reality for me, which is that my life has simply played out in a way that has not involved me having kids, call it "fate", call it a series of poor decisions that may have been made at a particularly critical time in my life, call it "bad luck", put it down to the recession or whatever, as you have mentioned in your post, a woman a few years older than me will simply not settle into the same emotional place when faced with the same realities.

Instead as you have pointed out, these days, producing a child seems seems to go to the very centre of her adult existence, so instead of ending up where I have found myself in terms of my view or in a somewhat similar or comparable place, an almost opposite view is adopted, which is that sperm donation is a last option, etc. I can tell you myself that not once but twice, I have been sounded out on internet dates (in dinner conversation), as to whether I would consider sleeping with a girl to make her pregnant, and I was advised that if I were ever open to the idea, I would not be held to maintenance or have my name put on a birth cert, etc, that basically no support of any type whatsoever, financial or otherwise, would be sought from me if I were to agree. I know of one girl personally (friend of a friend), who has proceeded with such as arrangement, and now has an infant child from this arrangement.

The point I'm still making is what on earth is so wrong with saying that maybe a woman will not have children? I have to accept that reality, loads of other guys have to accept that reality, I know women are generally more driven to have children than men, but I still think the difference in perception between single men and single women, (who do not have kids), is somewhat scary these days. Some single women I know who are hell bent on having a child, I wouldn't even consider to be that maternal, it often looks like a box ticking exercise to me, that because her friends are settled and having kids that therefore she has to go down the same route or otherwise she looks left on the shelf. It increasingly looks like sheer desperation I think. Guys just don't seem to worry about how it looks to the wider herd, it just is what it is, C'est La Vie!

Seriously? · 14-10-2014 11:30am

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

What I don't understand though is you saying a single woman your age who wants children is in a better position than a single man your age who wants children. Neither is in a great position but from a biological perspective, obviously the woman is in a worse one - I mean there's no contesting that.

Actually I'd contest that, let’s say they're early to mid thirties like the poster; that’s still an age at which a sizable number of women give birth.

Now as to who is in a better position when it comes to deciding who has kids; well that's got to be the woman since they're the only ones who get the call the shots on that score. Because when it comes to reproductive rights women have them and men don’t.

As to if they can financially support having kids, well on that score they are at best no worse off than a male and if we go by recent statistics, then if they're in a professional career then they're likely to be better off than the male counterpart.

Single life as a guy...

Comments