When meeting someone that is 33, single, and no kids. Red flag? (men, family)
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.
I'm going to dig a lot deeper into why a woman has kids and is divorced under 35 than why a woman is single and has no kids at 33.
Two 33 year old women...
One has 2 kids and is divorced
One has zero kids and has never been married
Which one really has the more questionable past? One committed to at least one man that wasn't the one and brought children into the world with him, yet the other one is worthy of extra investigation? Come on. Women have marriages and kids for horribly selfish reasons (family pressure, etc.), are we assuming single moms are OK because they've been married or had a kid?
Just because single moms are common doesn't mean they get a free pass in comparison to a single woman without kids. One probably made reasonable long term life decisions and one- not so much.
If you're in your 30s or 40s, a 33 year old woman with no marriages or kids is the best you can realistically hope for...
Any red flags brought up by the single, never-married woman will be trounced by the red flags of the divorced woman.
I don't buy the idea that children or divorces are red flags or that marital status determines who has issues that are red flags. There are plenty of people with issues that make them unfit for relationships and none of it has any bearing on whether or not they've been previously married. Unhealthy takes many forms.
Wanted to vote for two choices....
Men no, women yes.
My personal opinion is that if a woman is still "on the vine" at 33, there is a reason.
I know of two instances that proved me right, and I just met another woman in that category, who, despite being cute, financially sound, and well educated, gets dumped about once a year by nice men who find out she's nutty.
In my experience I have not seen the same phenomenon in men. I would raise the age to 40+ for men.
Wanted to vote for two choices....
Men no, women yes.
My personal opinion is that if a woman is still "on the vine" at 33, there is a reason.
I know of two instances that proved me right, and I just met another woman in that category, who, despite being cute, financially sound, and well educated, gets dumped about once a year by nice men who find out she's nutty.
In my experience I have not seen the same phenomenon in men. I would raise the age to 40+ for men.
Reading your post, I had to check your location, to see if that could explain your belief. You're north of Florida, and south of the corn belt? Sounds like you could be where the norm is to get married early. Being single and child-free is so normal, ordinary and ubiquitous in some parts of the country that no one bats an eye. Nobody reads anything into it, except possibly people's old-fashioned grandparents.
Just for one example, being single at 33 for a woman (as for some men) could mean she was in grad school until 30, then plunged into building her career. She may have started dating in the last year or two, but hasn't found the right guy yet. Just like her male peers, btw.
Wanted to vote for two choices....
Men no, women yes.
My personal opinion is that if a woman is still "on the vine" at 33, there is a reason.
I know of two instances that proved me right, and I just met another woman in that category, who, despite being cute, financially sound, and well educated, gets dumped about once a year by nice men who find out she's nutty.
In my experience I have not seen the same phenomenon in men. I would raise the age to 40+ for men.
There's a small iolta of truth to this statement. Very small though. I can only base this off a woman I communicated with online and exchanged numbers with. She was 35, been engaged, but never married. What I picked up from talking to her was that she was shy and lacked self confidence. It showed too, because she was an intelligent woman, but I think she lacked ambition. Has a Master's degree and talked about going to school for something else, yet she was an LPN and complained about it constantly. In a sense I felt like she was a bit of a dreamer. Nothing wrong with being a dreamer, but some of those dreams need to come true.
Now, this is just my assumption, but she's one that needed a lot of tender care and was a bit of a momma and daddy's girl as well. Nothing wrong with that either, but I found it odd that a woman in her 30s would buy a house right next door to her parents. I asked her how would your parents feel if you had a guy over and she replied that her mom would freak out. Instant TURN OFF for me. You're a 35 year old woman and your parents still spy on what you can and can't do. You may think you're independent, but you're not that independent living next door to your parents and they are still heavily involved in the decisions you make. No self-respecting guy is going to fall into that trap. It was a thanks but no thanks.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,935,179 times
Reputation: 40635
On the vine? Never heard that.
My date next Tuesday doesn't have kids, wants them someday. She's 34, the "reason" was she has been in school and just finished her Ph.D. Now she's doing post doc research and applying for faculty positions. Hardly a great economic place to have children, and esp with needing to move around quite a bit. Pretty darn good reason.
Of course, there could be a driven woman who has been busy on her career. As I think I said in my post, my opinion is based on my experiences only. My father married a 35 year old who was a witch on a broom, and my step son married a 34 year old who was an alcoholic and a drug user.
The single girl I mentioned is an ER nurse, with a vicious dog, who is so hyper she makes me tired after a half hour.
I guess the answer is, it depends.
This was me (and most of my friends) 13 years ago. It never occurred to me that my circumstances could/would be construed as a red flag. Why??
I think people view it as lacking the ability to commit. I suffer with it all the time and I actually don't fear commitment at all. Even more so if you've had short term relationships or there's been a lag in your long-term relationships. Think of it as a resume. If you're hiring someone, who are you going to be more thrilled with of both candidates are relatively equal? The candidate with steady work history or the candidate that hasn't worked in the last 3 years? You're making an educated guess on experience and a healthy resume looks better than a resume that lacks.
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.
