nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Single life as a guy...

LordNorbury

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!"...

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

mrty

Daveysil15 wrote: »

What if you were never in a relationship? Would it be a case of you never miss what you've never had?

Probably not sir, it would be nice, but I'm one off them folks who's been with someone since I left school. I guess I'm institutionalised at this stage in the game.

tashiusclay

cantdecide wrote: »

Society is quite harsh on single men. As someone who spent a waaaaaaaaaaayyy above average amount of time single (and mainly miserable as a consequence), the advice I would have given my past self or any single guy I know is to focus on the things that motivate you, that in some way define you and give you pleasure and for the most part forget about the expectations of family/ society, the ideas you had about where you would be when you were younger and any other factor that would cause that insecure chatter in your head. In a nutshell; focus on your life, your friends, your fun, your fulfilment even if that means accepting doing things on your own.

Your post is spot on, apart from the comment about society being harsh on single men, maybe that's the case with men up to their 30's, but from their 30's onward's I reckon its very much the opposite, life is pretty ok as a single man from the 30's upwards from what I can see so far. It seems a little more harsh for women from that age onwards, due to obvious biological reasons and the unfortunate social stigma of being a spinster. A pretty backwards stigma imo, but thats current Irish society for you.

Daveysil15

mrty wrote: »

Pros: Doing what you want when you want, mainly not have to do things or go places you don't want to. Slightly better off financially I guess.

Cons: Not having someone that loves you. Waking up in an empty bed and coming home to an empty house day after day. Physical contact with another human being is important too. Too many to list really. You can't half tell I'm just out a long term relationship.

What if you were never in a relationship? Would it be a case of you never miss what you've never had?

mrty

Pros: Doing what you want when you want, mainly not have to do things or go places you don't want to. Slightly better off financially I guess.

Cons: Not having someone that loves you. Waking up in an empty bed and coming home to an empty house day after day. Physical contact with another human being is important too. Too many to list really. You can't half tell I'm just out a long term relationship.

[Deleted User]

Geomy wrote: »

Remember guy's there's just as many single women out there if not more than men.

I love being single, im in my late 30s and notice that I have a great quality of life.

Myself and my male and female single friends often meet up for a coffee dinner etc

Just don't isolate too much it is what it is.

It's different for different people though. My 3 closest male friends have all moved away this year which makes organising stuff like that a bit hard to organise. :P

Geomy

Remember guy's there's just as many single women out there if not more than men.

I love being single, im in my late 30s and notice that I have a great quality of life.

Myself and my male and female single friends often meet up for a coffee dinner etc

Just don't isolate too much it is what it is.

Daveysil15

^^^^ Great post.

cantdecide

Society is quite harsh on single men. As someone who spent a waaaaaaaaaaayyy above average amount of time single (and mainly miserable as a consequence), the advice I would have given my past self or any single guy I know is to focus on the things that motivate you, that in some way define you and give you pleasure and for the most part forget about the expectations of family/ society, the ideas you had about where you would be when you were younger and any other factor that would cause that insecure chatter in your head. In a nutshell; focus on your life, your friends, your fun, your fulfilment even if that means accepting doing things on your own.

discus

Single life is great in some respects. I have it so good, I live on a military camp so I just live with tons of mates, go gym, go shopping, get nights out, do whatever the hell I want.

I imagine I'd go crazy if I was living in a regular flat, in a city or something. I'd feel so lonely and isolated.

AlanS181824

I haven't been single since I was about 13, really couldn't imagine my life without her tbh but sometimes I really envy the single life.

Pros would probably be the fact you're not tied to anyone, you can do what you like and indeed who you like.

Cons would probably be the loneliness, not having someone there with ye when there's bad days and good.

SpaceTime

I have to say I'm not particularly good at doing things on my own.

In finding myself extremely bored to the point that I think I might just emigrate to a much bigger city.

I find Dublin and Cork a bit too suburban and cliquey. They're fairly lousy for socialising and nights out if you're over 25 too.

Also everyone I know is now talking houses and kids and wondering why I don't have any!
I actually got a lecturing about what a good dad I'd be and what a 'waste' etc etc
Actually a bit upset by it tbh and it's caused me to redouble my efforts to move, find a new job abroad and permanently emigrate.

I don't know why people feel the need to start lecturing me about my personal life!

Montgolfier

I was single up to 30 then I met my wife.
Before that though I knew I was ready for a relationship. I was fitter than I'd ever been pulling gorgeous girls but it wasn't enough.
So I made a pact with myself not to have any casual relationships for a year. It broke a cycle of booze and women.
The older I got the more lonely I was when single.

Cons: I fat and unmotivated now, boring too.
Pros:I'm really happy with my little family, nothing else matters.

Tarzana

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Living alone might be more expensive as well as opposed to renting a one bedroom flat with a spouse or partner and splitting the rent and other costs.

Bigtime. Female here. I'm 30 and I was thinking the other day that if I became single, I'd have to move back into a house/flat share situation, as living alone wouldn't be financially possible for me. Having said that, cheaper living costs is no reason to get into a relationship. :pac:

take everything

walshb wrote: »

I would imagine the pros are that little bit more freedom and being in charge of your day. Less responsibility towards a partner.

Cons: Maybe loneliness. We are a social animal for the most part. Nice to have a companion to share your day with, your opinions with and your time with.

I'm single and for me i increasingly feel loneliness is more a symptom of something else.
I never experience loneliness if I'm honestly happy in myself/my life. if it does arise I know now it's simply an indication of something else- stressed by work/something else.
So deep down, as the Morrissey song goes, I'm ok by myself.
TBH a life alone would probably suit me better if I can do everything else I want in life.

Edit: One thing I will say is I do find myself getting paternal when I see parents having craic with their kids. I think that's the only thing I can honestly say I envy about them.

fits

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Ah yeah I agree with you there.

there is actually a lot to be said for getting very young children out of unhealthy family environments for a time. Look on it as subsidising the child, not the parents.
Anyway yep. OT

Pawwed Rig

Anyway lets get back on topic.

OP is

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!"...

Pawwed Rig

Sleepy wrote: »

Either way: why would someone who's not working or studying require childcare?

Ah yeah I agree with you there.

howamidifferent

To mind the childer while they go to the bookies or the pub or both...

Sleepy

Or more than likely, I subsidise the cradle to grave welfare of the child...

Either way: why would someone who's not working or studying require childcare?

Pawwed Rig

Sleepy wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. While the changes you've mentioned would be a great start (though I'd probably prefer to see a tax credit for each child and an increase in funding for childcare in 3rd level institutions than universally subsidised childcare: if you're not contributing to society or improving your prospects to do so in the future, I'd have a real problem with paying towards your childcare).

Swings and roundabouts. You subsidise the childcare while the child subsidises your pension and health insurance when you get older.

Sleepy

fits wrote: »

So having children has a heavily disproportionate impact on the careers of women.

In no way uncommon though. My father was my primary carer in the 80s and 90s. (after he retired)

Here's what needs to happen to even things out imo

1. Subsidised childcare so both parents can afford to continue to work. (current situation is shockingly bad)
2. Parental leave after initial maternity leave which can be taken by either parent. If fathers want to care for their young infants they should be allowed the opportunity.
3. Custody should not default to either mother or father, simply whatever is in childs best interests.

If women can remain financially secure and independent after having children, things would change a lot I think. The financial burden on separated fathers would be less.

Couldn't agree more. While the changes you've mentioned would be a great start (though I'd probably prefer to see a tax credit for each child and an increase in funding for childcare in 3rd level institutions than universally subsidised childcare: if you're not contributing to society or improving your prospects to do so in the future, I'd have a real problem with paying towards your childcare).

I think biology will always have a part to play on the impact of childbirth on a woman's career. Unless parental leave was forcibly split evenly between the parents, or women begin to include a willingness to put a career on hold as selection criteria for their sexual partners, I can't see it ever being widely used by fathers. Even in either of these cases, women will still require / continue to take more parental leave than men and this will have it's impact.

LordNorbury wrote: »

I think though that the other bigger problem still is that the sheer amount of income that is needed to have a family in this country, is so high, that it still requires both parents to go out and work full time. It really does often appear like it is running very fast, just to try to stay on the threadmill, and the chances of falling off the thread mill seem very real these days, the the consequences of falling off the threadmill, to me, are so high, that you'd question the logic of getting up on the threadmill in the first place.

This on the face of it, probably sounds like I am very distrustful of women, whereas this is not where my distrust actually lies at all, it is the whole system these days, the way it squeezes the absolute and utter shít out of the middle class, the average Joe, a system where the cost of a crèche for a child, is the same as your monthly mortgage, (if you are lucky to have a mortgage of around 1k a month!), where couples on 100k are struggling to pay bills, the stress of enduring this must be enormous.

I think you may be focusing too much on the financials tbh. As someone doing what I hope is an okay job of raising a family on less than that, while financially it can be difficult and we don't have much capacity to deal with the unexpected, it is do-able and since the 100k figure only applies to a small percentage of Irish households, there are lots of us managing it.

I think many of us who were raised in middle-class families fail to recognise that while, in worldview and education we share middle-class values, our own families represent a new breed of working class. We tend to be white collar cogs in global IT/Pharma/Finance companies rather than blue-collar labourers and factory workers (which exist in far fewer numbers than during our own childhood).

In much the same way that few of us have remained in the same class as our parents, the children of that old working class either took advantage of our education system and joined the ranks of this new "white collar working class", took to the building sites / retail / low-skilled service industries or ended up as part of the non-working classes and merely exist as a drain on the state.

LordNorbury

fits wrote: »

agreed mostly. Couples on 100k really shouldn't be struggling if they don't have boom time mortgages and debts though.

I think most couples I know would be on the 60-80k income bracket, where each would be earning around 35k, so a median income would be around 70k. With 2 kids, I could see how, (and I see it every day so I know these folks are struggling financially), this would be a struggle. It is worth mentioning also that in my view, the stress of these situations is fairly apparent, these marriages don't seem like happy & content marriages, the struggle in my view, has taken a toll on the relationship.

fits

LordNorbury wrote: »

it is the whole system these days, the way it squeezes the absolute and utter shít out of the middle class, the average Joe, a system where the cost of a crèche for a child, is the same as your monthly mortgage, (if you are lucky to have a mortgage of around 1k a month!), where couples on 100k are struggling to pay bills, the stress of enduring this must be enormous.

agreed mostly. Couples on 100k really shouldn't be struggling if they don't have boom time mortgages and debts though.

LordNorbury

fits wrote: »

So having children has a heavily disproportionate impact on the careers of women.

In no way uncommon though. My father was my primary carer in the 80s and 90s. (after he retired)

Here's what needs to happen to even things out imo

1. Subsidised childcare so both parents can afford to continue to work. (current situation is shockingly bad)
2. Parental leave after initial maternity leave which can be taken by either parent. If fathers want to care for their young infants they should be allowed the opportunity.
3. Custody should not default to either mother or father, simply whatever is in childs best interests.

If women can remain financially secure and independent after having children, things would change a lot I think. The financial burden on separated fathers would be less.

I think though that the other bigger problem still is that the sheer amount of income that is needed to have a family in this country, is so high, that it still requires both parents to go out and work full time. It really does often appear like it is running very fast, just to try to stay on the threadmill, and the chances of falling off the thread mill seem very real these days, the the consequences of falling off the threadmill, to me, are so high, that you'd question the logic of getting up on the threadmill in the first place.

This on the face of it, probably sounds like I am very distrustful of women, whereas this is not where my distrust actually lies at all, it is the whole system these days, the way it squeezes the absolute and utter shít out of the middle class, the average Joe, a system where the cost of a crèche for a child, is the same as your monthly mortgage, (if you are lucky to have a mortgage of around 1k a month!), where couples on 100k are struggling to pay bills, the stress of enduring this must be enormous.

fits

Sleepy wrote: »

Because, due to educational and career choices, the impact of maternity leave on a career and living according to the societal norms that legal system has created (or been codified from), Irish people typically default into the roles of father as primary earner and mother as primary carer (whether she has a career of her own or not).

So having children has a heavily disproportionate impact on the careers of women.

Of course, there are deviations from the norm, there are mothers who are the primary earner and men who give up or put their career on the back burner to be the primary carer but I don't think it's any great claim to say that they're still the exception rather than the norm.

In no way uncommon though. My father was my primary carer in the 80s and 90s. (after he retired)

Here's what needs to happen to even things out imo

1. Subsidised childcare so both parents can afford to continue to work. (current situation is shockingly bad)
2. Parental leave after initial maternity leave which can be taken by either parent. If fathers want to care for their young infants they should be allowed the opportunity.
3. Custody should not default to either mother or father, simply whatever is in childs best interests.

If women can remain financially secure and independent after having children, things would change a lot I think. The financial burden on separated fathers would be less.

Yearning4Stormy

<temporary_off_topicness> M'Lud, it was something she insisted on, many years prior to the full Judicial Separation (2013). I was familiar enough with Family Law to know you don't féck with the system; I didn't want anything going against me, come court time. </temporary_off_topicness>

EDIT: Mea culpa, LordNorbury, that was *totally* disingenuous... I've been living in total fear these last few years that anything untoward I do will be reported back to her brief and I'll lose access to best part of my week, my children *My* life choices will *not* let that happen.

/Thread back on track

LordNorbury

Yearning4Stormy wrote: »

I have my kids all weekend, every weekend, and their mother precludes anyone else being here.)

I would have thought this could never happen if the two of you have separated & basically permanently spilt up? I don't want to go off topic but that sounds like a strange rule to be living under.

Having said that, I ran into something very similar when dating a girl last year, she had a kid & her ex (the child's father), wished to meet me and basically vet me. This hugely annoyed her, on the basis that she did not have the same right to sound out his new girlfriend and vet her. I felt though that if I was a father, I would be the very same, putting my child's safety first and before anything else, given the times we are living in. In the end I never met the ex but it did make me stop & think about dating a girl with a kid.

Sleepy

fits wrote: »

Why do you say heavily disproportionate?

Because, due to educational and career choices, the impact of maternity leave on a career and living according to the societal norms that legal system has created (or been codified from), Irish people typically default into the roles of father as primary earner and mother as primary carer (whether she has a career of her own or not).

Of course, there are deviations from the norm, there are mothers who are the primary earner and men who give up or put their career on the back burner to be the primary carer but I don't think it's any great claim to say that they're still the exception rather than the norm.

Despite huge advances in gender equality, our legal system still defaults to the seeing the mother as the primary carer (even when that doesn't match reality). Both in our constitution and through a court system of judges born in an age where such deviations were unfathomable.

So, while there's no arguing that women don't suffer emotionally and financially in a relationship breakdown, our society is far, far less likely to make them leave the family home, far less likely to leave them as part-time parents and, as the suicide statistics demonstrate, far less likely to see no future for themselves.

Yearning4Stormy

This, imho, is one of the best threads in months... and I only accidentally stumbled upon it with the new Android app-thing.

Wibbs, (despite your avatar giving me the bird, which riles me unaccountably) you deserve a medal for your well-thought-out reasoning throughout this thread, but I'm not going to paraphrase you, it's all good.

What about guys who are simply taking themselves out of the dating game, explicitly and intentionally? Since my marriage imploded in 2008, I've been in three LT relationships (a year-ish each) and couple of lesser (time wise) relationships where all but one disintegrated (ultimately) due to the ongoing commitment I have to my children and the financial commitment I have to my ex-wife. (The all-but-one was a trainwreck where she decided to go back to her feckless, separated, abusive husband.)

God know I'm not try to apportion blame (on my ex) or be in any way misogynist, but that's just the way it is. When my marriage broke up, I made commitments (before the courts) that I'm now committed to; commitments I've never reneged on.

I find the two (dating and ex-ness) to be mutually exclusive (certainly in my current economic state). I try to play Devil's Advocate, but it's got to be difficult for a woman to realise you're not exclusive 24/7 (I have my kids all weekend, every weekend, and their mother precludes anyone else being here.)

So, I've made the choice that I will be forever-single (or at least until my kids are grown), but as previous posters have said, it's the crippling loneliness that's the worst. What I would give to be able to cook something other than a meal-for-one during the week, to hear someone say after a jangling of keys, "Hey, hon', I'm home!", or to wake up in the morning with someone beside me.

Incidentally, Wibbs, "The One (tm)" was the one who went back to her husband. Typical, huh.

fits

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Of course one parent shouldn't have to shoulder the entire financial burden but the other parent should have equal rights in terms of being with the children.

In general, yes. But every case is different and the childrens best interests (whatever they are) should be at the heart of any decision.

anyway, way off topic and I'm not a guy, or single, so I'll bow out.