36 and intolerant

Spencer Winterbotham

I go out fishing wth a friend of mine whenever I get home to the Emerald Isle. He is an older gentleman. Every time we going fishing he asks me if I am married yet, to which I reply that I am not and then he interrogates me as to the reason why. I usually tell him to pipe down.

Then one day he said something interesting which I dismissed outright at the time. He said I really shouldn't wait much longer because the older I get and the more time that I am alone the less tolerate I will be of any prospective partner's idiosyncrasies. As time moves on I am starting to see exactly what he means.

I am not an unattractive chap and am quite successful. I do not struggle to gain the attentions of the fairer sex..... however the last several dates that I have been on have been doomed by relatively minor things which at the time I completely baulked at and deemed were deal breakers.

I was seining this lovely American girl. We went for breakfast at the hotel. Her voice... she spoke really loudly. This was in Germany and people began to look at her... I actually asked her to keep her voice down... It ended soon after...

I was watching a movie with a lady at my apartment.... she started asking questions.... I helpfully replied to the first couple of questions but when they kept coming I stopped the movie and just looked at her and said.... "Are you fcuking serious".... she up and left....

And on and on..... The more I think about it, nearly every woman I have been out with in the last 5 years has never gotten past the first few dates as something would happen or she would say something and I would just say to myself...... "Ok.. I'm out"....

Does anyone else find they are less able to deal the older they get on the dating scene?

bcklschaps

OP.... that story about watching the movie... made me laugh. I have had similar experiences while watching movies with GF's. But I am a bit of an irritable clint in general, even on a good day :-((

I just think people just get grumpy and irascible as they get older....not just in matters of romance, its everything from other drivers on the road to service in restaurants blah, de blah, blah, blah

ardinn

I'm 34 and in the exact same situation - I am quite happy in my own company but looking back I have found myself doing all of the above and more. I have one or 2 irregular fb's but other than that i have nearly given up on dating because, well, women are f*^$ing annoying as hell.

Im big into fishing op - maybe we could live together and be happy with our shared interests and love of being on our own most of the time

Wibbs

bcklschaps wrote: »

I am a bit of an irritable clint

Spencer Winterbotham wrote:

Does anyone else find they are less able to deal the older they get on the dating scene?

Yeah I'd broadly agree with that. I'd certainly have far less tolerance for some behaviours that I would have ignored(though been irritated by) at 25. My tolerance of emotionals is way down and my tolerance for nagging or emotional manipulation has reduced to almost zero.

Don't get me wrong women friends have been bloody fantastic and without them down the years my life would have been the lesser and no mistake. However girlfriends have been another matter. Some great times, yes, but with a more constant background head wreck. Almost like that's the "price" you pay? I even see that with women friends and their partners. Some worse than others of course, but I get no head wreck by comparison. With two mates it's like I know a different person. Complete head melts as girlfriends, but among the best friends you could wish for. The romantic element really seems to increase it.

Caveat: looking back there was certainly an element of me selecting for the type of woman that would be more high maintenance so milages vary. I'd also believe that men vary quite a bit with relationship needs and compatibility with women in general. When younger too. I have also found that men with more miles under their belt with more women are less tolerant*. Some, actually no, most men are better built for relationships. Some aren't and I've come to accept I'm more in the latter category TBH.



* I suppose the more experience the more likely that they've been screwed over more than once and they're less likely to "settle" because they've had more choice?

silverharp

Lets face it the more reasonable and easy to get on with girls are more likely to be off the market by their mid to late twenties. Maybe you are looking in the wrong places? if you are an outdoors type of person maybe take up some activities along this line and you will be more likely to bump into more down to earth types.

Wibbs

silverharp wrote: »

Lets face it the more reasonable and easy to get on with girls are more likely to be off the market by their mid to late twenties.

There's some element of truth to that alright. Similar could be said of men, at least going by what single women I know in their 30's and beyond have told me*. Some real dingbats out there... So yeah, men and women who are more relationship driven and have the personality that is "relationship compatible" are more likely to be in a solid one by say 30.




* from their telling the men seem to fall into two broad groups. Men who've very little to almost no relationship history and often for obvious reasons or men who've sowed more wild oats than an organic farmer and have little intention of "getting serious". The sweet spot seems to be those men who've been in a stable long termer that went kaput and are back on the market for an actual relationship.

Sleepy

I'm exactly 36 myself and although I'm married, I know myself that I'd be far less tolerant of personality flaws in a prospective partner nowadays than I would have been at 26.

_Brian

I think you need to weigh up how much you want to speak your mind against how much you'd like to be in a long term relationship.
I'm not saying you have to change to be on a relationship but anyone who says there aren't compromises to be made is telling lies.

Even the best most suitable compatible woman/man in the world will drop the odd doozie from time to time, like yourself, they're just human.

yourdeadwright

Its defo an age thing, women are the same ,
Both sex's wit age know what they want in a partner and have realised they have survived without one so aren't as likely to just settle for someone,
I also think if you are in a long relationship as you grow old you tend to be more tolerate of each other, as your used to each other's flaws ,

Peregrinus

The truth is that living on your own you do tend to become a bit selfish/self-indulgent. One of the advantages of single living is that you get to have things exactly the way you like all the time, and not have to argue for that, or account for that, or explain that to anybody. And you can get used to that, and then find that giving it up is a significant cost of entering into coupledom.

lawred2

Sleepy wrote: »

I'm exactly 36 myself and although I'm married, I know myself that I'd be far less tolerant of personality flaws in a prospective partner nowadays than I would have been at 26.

I find that I'm the polar opposite..

As I've got older I've gotten far more easy going.

LostinBlanch

Wibbs wrote: »

Yeah I'd broadly agree with that. I'd certainly have far less tolerance for some behaviours that I would have ignored(though been irritated by) at 25. My tolerance of emotionals is way down and my tolerance for nagging or emotional manipulation has reduced to almost zero.

Don't get me wrong women friends have been bloody fantastic and without them down the years my life would have been the lesser and no mistake. However girlfriends have been another matter. Some great times, yes, but with a more constant background head wreck. Almost like that's the "price" you pay? I even see that with women friends and their partners. Some worse than others of course, but I get no head wreck by comparison. With two mates it's like I know a different person. Complete head melts as girlfriends, but among the best friends you could wish for. The romantic element really seems to increase it.

Caveat: looking back there was certainly an element of me selecting for the type of woman that would be more high maintenance so milages vary. I'd also believe that men vary quite a bit with relationship needs and compatibility with women in general. When younger too. I have also found that men with more miles under their belt with more women are less tolerant*. Some, actually no, most men are better built for relationships. Some aren't and I've come to accept I'm more in the latter category TBH.



* I suppose the more experience the more likely that they've been screwed over more than once and they're less likely to "settle" because they've had more choice?

TLDR: Wibbs is a curmudgeon :P

SozBbz

OP, everyone, absolutely everyone is capable of being annoying at some point in time - if you actually want a relationship you might need to be more tollerent or at least less blunt in how you tell people they're being annoying.

If you don't infact want a relationship, then by all means become a curmudgeon to your hearts content and enjoy your live in peace :P

Sleepy

lawred2 wrote: »

I find that I'm the polar opposite..

As I've got older I've gotten far more easy going.

Oh, I'd say I'm a lot more easy going than I would have been in the past but I'd also be far more confident in who I am and what I have to offer. In my early 20's I wouldn't quite say that I was desperate but I was certainly more willing to put up with annoying traits in sexual partners than I should have been.

jimmycrackcorm

Spencer Winterbotham wrote:

I was seining this lovely American girl. We went for breakfast at the hotel. Her voice... she spoke really loudly. This was in Germany and people began to look at her... I actually asked her to keep her voice down... It ended soon after...

Spencer Winterbotham wrote:

I was watching a movie with a lady at my apartment.... she started asking questions.... I helpfully replied to the first couple of questions but when they kept coming I stopped the movie and just looked at her and said.... "Are you fcuking serious".... she up and left....

I don't think these are signs of being intolerant at all and you were right to make a point about those issues.

However you weren't being tactful in your approach and I think this isn't anything specific to age but a general lack of empathy in dealing with other human beings.

Flippyfloppy

Sleepy wrote: »

I'm exactly 36 myself and although I'm married, I know myself that I'd be far less tolerant of personality flaws in a prospective partner nowadays than I would have been at 26.

Happy 36th birthday !!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Peregrinus

Raising four children, it's a wonder that you find "hours every day" for teasing, laughing and reading books together!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bambi985

As an early 30s attached woman were I to be catapulted back into the singles market I'd avoid like the plague any man my age or older with little to no relationship experience. No long-termers, just a bunch of flings and fwbs and months-long affairs that went nowhere.

Because I think there comes a point where you can be "too single". Too set in your ways, your routine, too unable to compromise and too emotionally unavailable to penetrate beyond the surface. Too used to being an island of one and being unchallenged in that. I met those men when I was in my 20s and the longer they were single, the less "dateable" they were in a general sense. They didn't know how or even want to know how to be in a relationship, which by definition requires thinking about yourself and your life in an entirely different way. Thinking about yourself Plus One. I want to do X, but is X going to be good for her too? I want to go to Y, but is that going to be in keeping with a healthy relationship? From small things - choice of movie or food or modes of daily communication - to bigger decisions like moving in together and getting married, buying a property, all of that. It's impossible to plan with the uncompromising.

Wibbs

Bambi985 wrote: »

As an early 30s attached woman were I to be catapulted back into the singles market I'd avoid like the plague any man my age or older with little to no relationship experience.

I'd agree. Like I wrote previously;

Me. Being previous wrote: »

Men who've very little to almost no relationship history and often for obvious reasons or men who've sowed more wild oats than an organic farmer and have little intention of "getting serious". The sweet spot seems to be those men who've been in a stable long termer that went kaput and are back on the market for an actual relationship.

If I were a woman I'd be aiming at the above underlined guys. I know two women who specifically aimed at separated or divorced guys. They're already "domesticated" as it were. The guys with zero relationship history require an adjustment to their thinking to be in a relationship. If they can adjust. If they've been out of the picture until their mid 30's, let's face it there are usually reasons why. The guys who've lived the life of a rake generally don't want to "settle down", certainly not in their mid 30's where their choice levels go right up(the sociable and socially "acceptable" 35 year old man in the singles market is not short of options). You're probably looking at another five ten years before they might and even then they'll need "adjusting". Though the guys like that I have known when they did settle down they actually have good relationships. I suppose there may be an element of choices when young and experience so they settle down, not settle for? I dunno, but that has been my experience anyway.

long-termers, just a bunch of flings and fwbs and months-long affairs that went nowhere.

:eek: That lot pretty much sums up my history. Well, not the FWB bit really. A couple of abortive attempts at that, but quickly came to naught. TBH the long termers put me off, well... long termers. Not to toot my own horn(missus!) I'm actually pretty easy going and understanding. Noted for it. Even exes who wouldn't pee on me if I was on fire(few enough at that) would say that. Pretty adaptable too. I would be far less emotionally available though, simply because when I have been, I was fcuked over and the scar tissue built up. Being straight here? I don't really trust women's emotions or their oft found caprice, or more than that I certainly don't trust my choices in women. I can't paint all women in that manner as after all the common denominator in those relationships was me.

Sleepy

You sound quite like one of my closest friends Wibbs. He did the relationship thing in his late teens, got badly burnt and didn't go beyond a fling again until his 40th was closer than his 30th. And even then, tbh, his current relationship is a bit "part-time" in that it's always been long distance. It seems to be quite a common theme ime that the guy who's a free and easy playboy in his thirties is in some way reacting to heartbreak in his early adulthood.

Damn, looks like getting into a relationship is gonna be like the getting a job for me. Not enough experience to get one, no way to get experience without having experience. :pac:

SozBbz

Deleted User wrote: »

Damn, looks like getting into a relationship is gonna be like the getting a job for me. Not enough experience to get one, no way to get experience without having experience. :pac:

Ah now, don't be taking all this too seriously. Once you are aware that long term singlehood can make a person a bit tricky, then just watch your behaviour and don't be that guy!

My OH was 29 when we met and I was his first proper girlfriend - he'd dated people for a few weeks and had be somewhat dating a girl for less than a year but it was long distance and they were never official. He was definitely a bit challenging in certain things but not a lost cause by any means.

SozBbz

SozBbz wrote: »

Ah now, don't be taking all this too seriously. Once you are aware that long term singlehood can make a person a bit tricky, then just watch your behaviour and don't be that guy!

My OH was 29 when we met and I was his first proper girlfriend - he'd dated people for a few weeks and had be somewhat dating a girl for less than a year but it was long distance and they were never official. He was definitely a bit challenging in certain things but not a lost cause by any means.

Ah yeah it was partly tongue-in-cheek. I'm not a catch in most senses and I copped a few years ago that my lack of relationship experience would be yet another disadvantage. The few short-termers I've had ended cordially enough so I don't know if that's a positive or not. :pac:

El_Duderino 09

_Brian wrote: »

I think you need to weigh up how much you want to speak your mind against how much you'd like to be in a long term relationship.
I'm not saying you have to change to be on a relationship but anyone who says there aren't compromises to be made is telling lies.

Even the best most suitable compatible woman/man in the world will drop the odd doozie from time to time, like yourself, they're just human.

There's definitely a certain amount of give and take but I think the sweet spot is where you can speak your mind and not cause offence. Humourous passive aggression was basically invented for exactly this purpose.

You have to be able to tell people your preferences and that takes time in a relationship. You can't expect other people to know your likes and dislikes and what grind your gears. When you realise that you probably grind their gears in some ways too and they're entitled to let you know too, you either need to be willing to give and take or move on.

Wibbs

Sleepy wrote: »

You sound quite like one of my closest friends Wibbs. He did the relationship thing in his late teens, got badly burnt and didn't go beyond a fling again until his 40th was closer than his 30th.

With me S it was well after my teens TBH. Sure I had the first love(s) thang, but you move past that adolescent stuff(though at the time the world was ending ). I would have actually been quite the optimistic romantic type well into my 30's.

Then again maybe I'm just not particularly suited to the whole long termer thing so it worked out that way naturally? Hard to say, but I suspect I am. That sorta married with 2.2 kids in suburbia never appealed TBH. Those Denny taste of home adverts would always have been my idea of purgatory. I wouldn't be normal on that score though, but that's cool too. Takes all sorts. I'm just not amenable to "domestication".

Bambi985

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah yeah it was partly tongue-in-cheek. I'm not a catch in most senses and I copped a few years ago that my lack of relationship experience would be yet another disadvantage. The few short-termers I've had ended cordially enough so I don't know if that's a positive or not. :pac:

Yeah don't take what a few anonymous posters on boards.ie are saying as the word of god! It's just a few opinions thrown into the mix. As Wibbs has mentioned, mid-30s can be a relatively sweet spot for men who are looking for a relationship as you've generally got your life in gear and it's when women generally are looking to settle down with that kind of guy.

I think a big part of it can be the "How-To" thing that comes with relationship experience. Sometimes I think learning how to be in a relationship is a bit like learning a different language but without any formal lessons or training - in life you're just expected to learn the ropes as you move through your teens/20s and some people get a late start or get left out altogether which can make things a little bit more difficult as they get older.

A bit of a crap analogy, but if you've ever been skiing, you might remember seeing kids as young as five and six flying down the black pistes with not a care or a fear in the world. Then you'll see adults seven or eight times their age who are struggling to get up on their ski poles on the beginner slopes, overthinking the whole thing and crashing out. In life some people start into relationships in their teenage years, learn the "rules of conduct" and glide seemingly effortlessly from one relationship to another, settling down with ease. Then others just don't really meet anyone during those same formative years and end up in their 30s or 40s, long-term single and not knowing any other way. They've not learned the art of compromise and it's that bit tougher as they're older and more jaded and less flexible, less willing to take chances where their little bit of experience with the opposite sex has taught them that they may end up with egg on their face.

I think in those situations, the easiest option is to shut up shop emotionally, and that will translate to a lower tolerance to the habits and idiosyncrasies of another person. Those little personality differences and nuisances that their counter-parts have learned to just tolerate as part of a general partnership earlier in life.

Bambi985

Bambi985 wrote: »

Yeah don't take what a few anonymous posters on boards.ie are saying as the word of god! It's just a few opinions thrown into the mix. As Wibbs has mentioned, mid-30s can be a relatively sweet spot for men who are looking for a relationship as you've generally got your life in gear and it's when women generally are looking to settle down with that kind of guy.

Ah yeah, I'm not getting hung up on it. I'm trying to get out of the habit of listing negative things about myself because if gets fairly overwhelming fairly quick. :pac:

I think a big part of it can be the "How-To" thing that comes with relationship experience. Sometimes I think learning how to be in a relationship is a bit like learning a different language but without any formal lessons or training - in life you're just expected to learn the ropes as you move through your teens/20s and some people get a late start or get left out altogether which can make things a little bit more difficult as they get older.

A bit of a crap analogy, but if you've ever been skiing, you might remember seeing kids as young as five and six flying down the black pistes with not a care or a fear in the world. Then you'll see adults seven or eight times their age who are struggling to get up on their ski poles on the beginner slopes, overthinking the whole thing and crashing out. In life some people start into relationships in their teenage years, learn the "rules of conduct" and glide seemingly effortlessly from one relationship to another, settling down with ease. Then others just don't really meet anyone during those same formative years and end up in their 30s or 40s, long-term single and not knowing any other way. They've not learned the art of compromise and it's that bit tougher as they're older and more jaded and less flexible, less willing to take chances where their little bit of experience with the opposite sex has taught them that they may end up with egg on their face.

I think in those situations, the easiest option is to shut up shop emotionally, and that will translate to a lower tolerance to the habits and idiosyncrasies of another person. Those little personality differences and nuisances that their counter-parts have learned to just tolerate as part of a general partnership earlier in life.

Yeah in a weird way I guess my total lack of experience might be better than the experience some people get. I know people who go from relationship to relationship, drama to drama, never learning anything and they seem to think it's normal. Obviously looking in from the outside is one thing but I've seen a lot that I know to look out for now. :P The little experience I've had has been with women who had been in long-termers, usually just petered out, better than looking for conflict all the time. :P

Resist ZOG

Can't believe the crap I put up with in my twenties. How I'd love to go back in time and tell myself to grow a pair.

Eric Cartman

Spencer Winterbotham wrote: »

I go out fishing wth a friend of mine whenever I get home to the Emerald Isle. He is an older gentleman. Every time we going fishing he asks me if I am married yet, to which I reply that I am not and then he interrogates me as to the reason why. I usually tell him to pipe down.

Then one day he said something interesting which I dismissed outright at the time. He said I really shouldn't wait much longer because the older I get and the more time that I am alone the less tolerate I will be of any prospective partner's idiosyncrasies. As time moves on I am starting to see exactly what he means.

I am not an unattractive chap and am quite successful. I do not struggle to gain the attentions of the fairer sex..... however the last several dates that I have been on have been doomed by relatively minor things which at the time I completely baulked at and deemed were deal breakers.

I was seining this lovely American girl. We went for breakfast at the hotel. Her voice... she spoke really loudly. This was in Germany and people began to look at her... I actually asked her to keep her voice down... It ended soon after...

I was watching a movie with a lady at my apartment.... she started asking questions.... I helpfully replied to the first couple of questions but when they kept coming I stopped the movie and just looked at her and said.... "Are you fcuking serious".... she up and left....

And on and on..... The more I think about it, nearly every woman I have been out with in the last 5 years has never gotten past the first few dates as something would happen or she would say something and I would just say to myself...... "Ok.. I'm out"....

Does anyone else find they are less able to deal the older they get on the dating scene?

I have to say that would be a deal breaker for me. I absolutely hate that , Some women definitely just do it to see how much attention you're paying to her vs the movie.

El_Duderino 09

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I have to say that would be a deal breaker for me. I absolutely hate that , Some women definitely just do it to see how much attention you're paying to her vs the movie.

That's annoying alright. But 'I just looked at her and said 'are you fcuking serious?' is rude in the extreme. There were dozens of better ways to deal with that situation starting by simply saying that you don't like people talking during a film.

Just looking at someone and saying 'are you fcuking serious?' is almost never the best way to get what you want.

Sometimes watching a movie is simply watching a movie. Sometimes watching a movie is a pretext for spending time together and chatting.

' I just looked at her and said 'are you fcuking serious?'' LOL. Is it possible that the op means '36 and forgotten common manners necessary to spend time with other people' rather than '36 and intolerant'?

kunst nugget

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I have to say that would be a deal breaker for me. I absolutely hate that , Some women definitely just do it to see how much attention you're paying to her vs the movie.

A dealbreaker for me would be someone cheating on me. Asking stupid questions during a movie is something I can take the unmerciful piss out of. The wife does it and she wouldn't give two shíts whether she's getting any attention off me or not. I just invent ludicrous back stories for the characters any time she says 'And whose this chap now?'

Bandana boy

kunst nugget wrote: »

I just invent ludicrous back stories for the characters any time she says 'And whose this chap now?'

That is brilliant , I will totally be robbing that strategy

kunst nugget

Bandana boy wrote: »

That is brilliant , I will totally be robbing that strategy

'Oh that guy? He's ex-KGB. He was kicked out because of his love of bananas and now he's forced to train bears in a travelling circus to fund his spiraling Subbuteo addiction…'

Much better fun than stopping the film and saying 'Are you fúcking serious?!?!'

Jrop

I'm a divil for asking questions. my Oh will be watching something I walk into the room and start quizzing him.

The poor fella he has the patience of a saint.

newport2

kunst nugget wrote: »

A dealbreaker for me would be someone cheating on me. Asking stupid questions during a movie is something I can take the unmerciful piss out of. The wife does it and she wouldn't give two shíts whether she's getting any attention off me or not. I just invent ludicrous back stories for the characters any time she says 'And whose this chap now?'

Have to try that too, my wife has the attention span of a grasshopper when we're watching things. I'll think up a few in advance for when she asks

Richard Hillman

Bambi985 wrote: »

Because I think there comes a point where you can be "too single". Too set in your ways, your routine, too unable to compromise and too emotionally unavailable to penetrate beyond the surface. Too used to being an island of one and being unchallenged in that.

This is the most profound thing I have read that has evaluated my life. I have become institutionalized into being single and will not compromise any of my weekly activities to give up on the pursuit of a relationship.

I'm gonna stay single but now I know why I am so avoidant into even entertaining the thought of a relationship.

the_syco

Spencer Winterbotham wrote: »

Does anyone else find they are less able to deal the older they get on the dating scene?

As opposed to the fact that they may be still single due to the reasons you didn't like them?

Bambi985 wrote: »

Then others just don't really meet anyone during those same formative years and end up in their 30s or 40s, long-term single and not knowing any other way.

Personally, I don't think I see the non-verbal cues, and thus missed out the early kills in my early 20's, but now in my mid thirties, I still don't see the non-verbal cues so will be probably be single a bit longer. Meh.

johnnyskeleton

Bambi985 wrote: »

As an early 30s attached woman were I to be catapulted back into the singles market I'd avoid like the plague any man my age or older with little to no relationship experience. No long-termers, just a bunch of flings and fwbs and months-long affairs that went nowhere.

Because I think there comes a point where you can be "too single". Too set in your ways, your routine, too unable to compromise and too emotionally unavailable to penetrate beyond the surface. Too used to being an island of one and being unchallenged in that. I met those men when I was in my 20s and the longer they were single, the less "dateable" they were in a general sense. They didn't know how or even want to know how to be in a relationship, which by definition requires thinking about yourself and your life in an entirely different way. Thinking about yourself Plus One. I want to do X, but is X going to be good for her too? I want to go to Y, but is that going to be in keeping with a healthy relationship? From small things - choice of movie or food or modes of daily communication - to bigger decisions like moving in together and getting married, buying a property, all of that. It's impossible to plan with the uncompromising.

Do you not see that you could also be accused of the one being uncompromising? As in, I refuse to date anyone who is too much of an individual. Worse, you aren't dealing with the actual person so much as the person's "previous owner history".

Well, it's just a bit ironic, is all.

johnnyskeleton

Wibbs wrote: »

If I were a woman I'd be aiming at the above underlined guys. I know two women who specifically aimed at separated or divorced guys. They're already "domesticated" as it were. The guys with zero relationship history require an adjustment to their thinking to be in a relationship. If they can adjust. If they've been out of the picture until their mid 30's, let's face it there are usually reasons why.

This sounds absolutely horrible. They want a man who has been broken by a bad relationship because they believe he will be less likely to buck when they deign to turn their attentions to him!

Imagine a man said that he only dates women who have had bad relationships and are more likely to compromise to his needs!

SozBbz

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

This sounds absolutely horrible. They want a man who has been broken by a bad relationship because they believe he will be less likely to buck when they deign to turn their attentions to him!

Imagine a man said that he only dates women who have had bad relationships and are more likely to compromise to his needs!

Relationships can just run their course, just because they end, it doesn't mean they were bad relationships.

A bad relationship in my mind is one where abuse was present or cheating etc. People break up for all sorts of reasons, often quite benign.

Wibbs

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

This sounds absolutely horrible. They want a man who has been broken by a bad relationship because they believe he will be less likely to buck when they deign to turn their attentions to him!

Well it can be partly that. Though the guy may not have come from a bad relationship(s). Relationships fail for all sorts of reasons. Plain boredom can be one, especially if someone has been in one or two relationships with little single time from 18 to 30. So with a guy with that sort of stable longterm relationship history it's as much that such a guy is already, for the want of a better word, "housetrained". And given most such longtermers it's the women calling time, it suggests a kind of stability in such men. For many women in their 30's looking to settle down, start families and all that, this is fairly important. And practical with it. Like I said if I was a woman in that position they'd be guys that would appeal more as long term prospects than the unfettered rake or the endlessly single.

Hell if I was a guy looking for the same thing otherwise attractive endlessly single or promiscuous women could fire up red flags.

Women often change what they seek out in a man depending on age and future planning and can have very different traits in mind at 20 compared to 30. I've seen this a lot with women mates, acquaintances and exes. The mating call to drift to the suburbs makes for different choices. It is what it is.

johnnyskeleton

SozBbz wrote: »

Relationships can just run their course, just because they end, it doesn't mean they were bad relationships.

A bad relationship in my mind is one where abuse was present or cheating etc. People break up for all sorts of reasons, often quite benign.

Sure, but he was talking about divorce or separation of marraige. And while there are many causes, it's rare that a marriage (as opposed to a shorter term relationship) ends in divorce or separation and people go "ah, it just ran it's course". I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that if someone is divorced that the relationship ended badly.

In either event, that doesn't really address those people who apparently have a preference for men who have been divorced because they have been broken in!

johnnyskeleton

Wibbs wrote: »

So with a guy with that sort of stable longterm relationship history it's as much that such a guy is already, for the want of a better word, "housetrained".

This sounds even worse. But again, what if a man said that he wasn't interested in a woman who had never been married because, for example, divorced women are more likely to have sex or some such logic.

I suppose I might actually be making a kind of politically correct point in a way, but while people can select partners based on any criteria they want, actually vocalising these thoughts and not having the self awareness to understand what they are saying is kinda worrying on these women's part!

kunst nugget

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

This sounds even worse. But again, what if a man said that he wasn't interested in a woman who had never been married because, for example, divorced women are more likely to have sex or some such logic.

I suppose I might actually be making a kind of politically correct point in a way, but while people can select partners based on any criteria they want, actually vocalising these thoughts and not having the self awareness to understand what they are saying is kinda worrying on these women's part!

I could understand someone going for people that have already been in long term relationships over someone that has been permanently single. The person that's been in been in relationships before is most likely going to have some understanding of the small compromises that occur to make relationships work. I think Wibbs was just being knowingly indelicate in calling them 'house-trained'…

Wibbs

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

This sounds even worse. But again, what if a man said that he wasn't interested in a woman who had never been married because, for example, divorced women are more likely to have sex or some such logic.

Well if that's what he believed then off he should pop and choose accordingly. Wouldn't worry me TBH. We all make such choices based on internal beliefs and wishes.

SozBbz

Wibbs wrote: »

* from their telling the men seem to fall into two broad groups. Men who've very little to almost no relationship history and often for obvious reasons or men who've sowed more wild oats than an organic farmer and have little intention of "getting serious". The sweet spot seems to be those men who've been in a stable long termer that went kaput and are back on the market for an actual relationship.

This is the post that started it all. I know Wibbs then referenced friends of his who like married/seperated guys, but thats not necessarily cynical - maybe at their age, thats just the reality.

The original point, that having some relationship experience is a good thing is still valid though - if a guy is 40 and has always been single, you're justified in wondering why. Also if you've gotten to 40 without having to share your life with someone, its likely you've some pretty entrenched habits.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

This sounds even worse. But again, what if a man said that he wasn't interested in a woman who had never been married because, for example, divorced women are more likely to have sex or some such logic.

Thats some leap!

pilly

Just from a female perspective here, I've been married, had long term relationships, short term ones and fb.

After a long period now of not living with someone I do worry that I wouldn't be able to adapt to it again. You do tend to get into a routine that doesn't involve answering to anyone and also you get a lot of alone time.

What would worry me now about living with someone is what if I just want to be on my own even for a few hours?

I agree with other posters though on the subject of being wary of someone who's never lived with someone else. I just tend to wonder why. I had a relationship once with a confirmed bachelor and I soon found out why. He was totally inflexible about his routine. Had to have dinner at a certain time etc. Drove me mad.

On the other hand, I'm still a great believer that there's someone out there for everyone.

OP, it really depends what you want out of life, if you want kids you really do need to think seriously about this. If not, then you've all the time in the world really to wait for the right person.

I would be wondering about the reason someone had no relationship experience, and even if the reason was innocuous enough like shyness, I'd worry about how it would work being a mature adults first partner. My gut feeling would be that they would be likely to be pretty possessive or jealous as presumably if they've wanted a relationship for a long time they'd be guarding it pretty closely when it does happen. If I was on the market, I'd be wary of those factors.

I know middle-aged batchelors, and while most of them seem perfectly open and flexible, there's one in particular I feel would find it almost impossible to adapt to having to allow for another person in their lives. If I got a hint of that off anyone, I'd be a goner. I like flexibility and adapability in a person and someone rigidly set in their ways wouldn't be something I'd take on. Life is just too short to hope someone changes.

That said, I like to think there's a lid for every pot.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.