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.
Ironically, the women "lucky to have you" they're referring to are the very "biological clock tickers" you said you want to avoid. Especially considering that it's after they got partying out of their systems, and now gravitate to stable, reliable men like yourself, albeit for the wrong reasons. There's a controversial school of thought on all this; it rhymes with "Bread Bill". I don't fully agree with it, because it's very hyperbolic, but eh.
You are right, about that, i know most girts (not all) go through that party phase and when they pass that they want stable guys, who they can get married to and have a family with (I don't fit the bill in that sense) I am curious what is this school of thought you speak of?.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,753,896 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBrown333
I am with you there, I have plenty of lady friends who tell me all the time "you are such a great guy" and "you will make some girl very happy one day" my problem is its going to take a very specific type of woman. for the meantime I will just keep living my life and see what happens, and keep my eyes open for any opportunities that may come my way. older woman is something I am not opposed to if the right situation comes along.
That is one thing that is my pet peeve. People saying "you're such a catch" knowing damned well they would reject me if I was romantically interested. I agree that you'll probably have to wait for a woman who has gotten the biological urges to reproduce out of her system and wants you more than she wants the Disney life.
Even if it's not a woman who desires children, she may find the labeling of those who choose to raise families as "seeking a Disney life" to be rather asinine and condescending. Not all people without children are dismissive and scornful of families. It may help to focus only on those who are, if that's your perspective.
i didn't read all the posts, but my suggestion would be to first look for a woman who does not want children either. There are many of them out there.
Since we don't know why you don't want to get married or cohabitation, I'll just make some assumptions that it's because you like your space, and your own selfish pursuits, and you don't want to accommodate someone else. There are women who feel the same way, especially career oriented ones. It is remotely possible that you might want to live with a woman who you enjoy being with, if she shared your feelings about these things. I mean if you both respected each other's space.
How about looking online, and being very specific? You might get some hits, who knows.
You are right, about that, i know most girts (not all) go through that party phase and when they pass that they want stable guys, who they can get married to and have a family with (I don't fit the bill in that sense) I am curious what is this school of thought you speak of?.
The school of thought is the pill that happens to be the same color as a firetruck. It's against TOS to discuss it, so I'll leave it at that.
Even so, I feel like the women who "want a stable man after getting partying out of their system" are drawn to me for the wrong reasons. Namely, they want to be with me not because they find me attractive and/or exciting, not because they see me as a fun time-filler (as was the case with one woman I dated), but because they want something from me: the stability I allegedly can give. I'm sure the OP feels the same way.
Being in a relationship requires having common goals. Your goals are only about you. You can't have it both ways, so good luck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBrown333
ah okay, thank you for clarifying. but in my situation wouldn't me and the girl establish we feel the same about those topics before we started anything, therefore we would have the same goals? and what do you mean by both ways?.
I have to agree with the OP on this. As I said before, I think the issue is that not many women in his age group are going to have the same goals, but I don't think his goals are inherently flawed by any means and I would happily have the kind of relationship he's describing - but now, in my 50s, and it would have been the last thing I wanted in my 30s.
However, as long as he's honest with women about what he wants, I think he's entitled to seek what he thinks will make him happy, just like anyone else. And I disagree with the idea of seeking out younger women for a short term relationship thinking they will be ok having a no strings attached relationship (long term/permanent strings, anyway) and they'll just move on when they do want something more likely to lead to marriage. That's a recipe for heartbreak IMO, because the reality is that most young women do end up ultimately wanting marriage and kids at some point, and it's going to be a lot easier if they aren't in love with someone who doesn't want it at all.
My obsession in this case is about vocabulary. I don't like when people take an existing word and try to pretend it means something other than what it means.
OP (and you) are entitled to try to find whatever relationship you want - whether you'll find it is a different story but besides the point.
What I object to is taking something that doesn't fit the definition of a "committed relationship" yet calling it that. Why bother? Stop pretending it's something that it's not. If you don't want to be in what is commonly understood to be a committed relationship, then be in whatever you want, and call it something else besides a term that is already in use with a different meaning.
exactly what I was thinking. Sounds like OP and others want an exclusive FWB situation - the sex, company, and fun times with none of the work of a real relationship. Just call it what it is and stop pretending it's a committed relationship.
exactly what I was thinking. Sounds like OP and others want an exclusive FWB situation - the sex, company, and fun times with none of the work of a real relationship. Just call it what it is and stop pretending it's a committed relationship.
OK, I'll bite. (Because I fall into the same category of people as the OP.) If I were to have a relationship, what in the world would I benefit from an LTR over an exclusive FWB? Hmm? Meaning, besides Hollywood ideas like "love", "work", and all that jazz.
And also, if you take sex out of the equation, keeping the companionship and the fun times, what you got is a friendship. Which I'd be totally cool with.
Last edited by MillennialUrbanist; 03-22-2017 at 08:51 AM..
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.
. I don't fully agree with it, because it's very hyperbolic, but eh.
