Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The 40 year old attractive, good career, no baggage, good conversationalist, sensitive yet outgoing, mysterious yet fun guy isn't anywhere found because he is busy with the 25 year old gal?
And what you have leftover on POF are the guys who are NOT the above.
Maybe if all the 40-year-olds are taking all the 20-something women is why so many young guys on the dating sites were interested in me. Seriously there *are* a lot of guys out like that... cubs looking for a cougar or something.
I see your point, although I am not looking to what you described. A man with "no baggage" hasn't lived life for one thing. I want a man who's had ups and downs in his life, just like me. Mysterious is a big turn off. My ex tried to be that way, I hated it. I prefer men who can communicate. Mysterious seem immature to me.
I tend to look at men like me (at least where they are in life)... the single dad, about my age, with kids about my kid's age (although I have to be flexible on this as people start their married lives/have kids at all kinds of ages). Like I said, no shortage of these kinds of guys and they are the vast majority of the men out there over 40. The biggest hurdle is they all seem to want to get very serious, very fast (and some bring up marriage). I do know of men like me (single, single parent, yada yada not looking to remarry) but most of them don't date at all... they say they want to wait until the kids leave the nest. Sometimes I think that might be a good idea for me too.
The 40 year old attractive, good career, no baggage, good conversationalist, sensitive yet outgoing, mysterious yet fun guy isn't anywhere found because he is busy with the 25 year old gal?
And what you have leftover on POF are the guys who are NOT the above.
and guys who don't believe they could ever pull a 25 year old hottie. And that's a mark of low self confidence and lack of overall game....thus making these men unattractive (read: non-existent) to women looking. If anyone claims otherwise, go on any dating website and see that indeed there are many results for men fitting that exact criteria.
Those men are out there, its just that many people have skewed perception of their own sexual market value. IMHO, women peak sexual value is between ages of 18-24 , while men do not peak until their late 30s for obvious reasons based in evolutionary theory. By the time a man is 40, he usually has a pretty good career, good social standing and knows exactly how to get what he wants. He now has a pick of 20 somethings who will gladly date him for a night or two. Gee, should he choose a 25 year old, no string attached hottie or a post wall 40 something desperate woman with declining looks?
This is very interesting. We used to have a member here, "Ascension", who was really into these same theories and opinions. Has he started a blog, or something? That's all the internet needs, is an Ascension blog, lol!
I would say less than 20% of men over 40 are "reasonably fit". Most have a belly gut, etc. So that qualifier alone already disqualifies 80% of men.
50% of men are balding at that age too or have gone bald or are unattractive.
Let's give the benefit of the doubt and say 80% of men carry a good conversation.
Let's assume 50% of THOSE are not looking for "insta wife" "insta girlfriend" whatever that means.
0.2 x 0.5 x 0.80 x 0.5 = 0.04
Simple mathematics show that basically you are looking for the top 4% of men. Although you make it appear like your qualifiers aren't very restrictive, when in reality, you've already disqualified 96% of men.
Now, my question to you is: Do you consider yourself a top 4% gal. If we lined you up against 99 other women, can you beat out 96 of them?
See, you're not reading (listening) closely enough. You quickly dismissed everything I explained was MY experience so that you can "prove" me wrong somehow. Apparently, I don't know what I'm talking about; I must have imagined those dates.
And you're focusing on looks way more than I did in my post. To me, for example, "reasonably fit" does not disqualify a guy who carries a few extra pounds. As long as he's not a couch potato, I wouldn't mind a bit of a belly, either. And a guy who's completely bald doesn't bother me in the slightest. An attractive guy is an attractive guy, with or without hair. So, you're making pretty big assumptions about me.
Have the men I've been out with been intelligent? Yes. Successful? Yes. Some have been attractive. Most seemed like fairly decent guys.
But I'll reiterate: the men I've been out with were not good at real dialogue for the purposes of getting to know me as a person. They were good talkers, but not good listeners. They seemed uninterested in discussing for very long anything that didn't concern them or their lives. I wondered why these men wanted to go out again and again, because they didn't seem to have any real interest in getting to know me as an individual.
Would you consider women like that good conversationalists? Would you want to continue to date women like that? Would you want to enter into a relationship with a woman like that? I'm guessing your answers to the above questions are NO, so I guess you're looking for the top 4% of women?
Those men are out there, its just that many people have skewed perception of their own sexual market value. IMHO, women peak sexual value is between ages of 18-24 , while men do not peak until their late 30s for obvious reasons based in evolutionary theory. By the time a man is 40, he usually has a pretty good career, good social standing and knows exactly how to get what he wants. He now has a pick of 20 somethings who will gladly date him for a night or two. Gee, should he choose a 25 year old, no string attached hottie or a post wall 40 something desperate woman with declining looks?
The men you say are so rare, are out there and there is plenty of them. You just choose to treat them as invisible.
Oh, so could you be so kind as to tell this "post wall" 40-something woman how I'm doing that?
This is very interesting. We used to have a member here, "Ascension", who was really into these same theories and opinions. Has he started a blog, or something? That's all the internet needs, is an Ascension blog, lol!
Not sure who that is, im fairly new to here, just spreading the knowledge and love to you guys. You are welcome!
The issue, here, seems to me to be not that any one of us are perfect, but that some of us set the bar so high (for whatever reason) that there is no one that get over it and then complain about the shortcomings of the opposite sex, based on their own experience.
We all make lists of what we want and don't want in a date or a partner. Then we either eventually pair off with the one who is closest to what we want, on balance, or end up without another date or a partner and complain how the members of the opposite sex are so "flawed".
Oh, so could you be so kind as to tell this "post wall" 40-something woman how I'm doing that?
Yes, you perceive your sexual market value higher than it actually is, while ignoring men who would likely be compatible dating prospects. Don't worry, you aren't alone. There are millions and millions of ladies with this exact problem. hope this helps.
See, you're not reading (listening) closely enough. You quickly dismissed everything I explained was MY experience so that you can "prove" me wrong somehow. Apparently, I don't know what I'm talking about; I must have imagined those dates.
And you're focusing on looks way more than I did in my post. To me, for example, "reasonably fit" does not disqualify a guy who carries a few extra pounds. As long as he's not a couch potato, I wouldn't mind a bit of a belly, either. And a guy who's completely bald doesn't bother me in the slightest. An attractive guy is an attractive guy, with or without hair. So, you're making pretty big assumptions about me.
Have the men I've been out with been intelligent? Yes. Successful? Yes. Some have been attractive. Most seemed like fairly decent guys.
But I'll reiterate: the men I've been out with were not good at real dialogue for the purposes of getting to know me as a person. They were good talkers, but not good listeners. They seemed uninterested in discussing for very long anything that didn't concern them or their lives. I wondered why these men wanted to go out again and again, because they didn't seem to have any real interest in getting to know me as an individual.
Would you consider women like that good conversationalists? Would you want to continue to date women like that? Would you want to enter into a relationship with a woman like that? I'm guessing your answers to the above questions are NO, so I guess you're looking for the top 4% of women?
My point is simply: If the first few dates, you are getting "bad matches or bad men", then perhaps it is their problem...or bad luck, or what-have-you.
But if after the tenth or twentieth date, you are still getting "bad matches or bad men", then perhaps it is time to take a hard look in the mirror?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
40-something woman how I'm doing that?