Unmarried men, at what age is something seriously amiss?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In your opinion, if a man is I married, but typical background (college, maybe masters or grad school, healthy dating background) no long trips or absences. At what point do you begin to thing it's that either he doesn't want to be married or is not marriage material?

Strong suspicion at 35, lost cause 40+.

[Anonymous]

At any age where the poor devil is still hanging around a gaggle of third-wave feminists who believe him to have been a lost cause since birth. He needs to high-tail it out of there post-haste!

[Anonymous]

Nice thread necromancy!

The reality is that most men who are pushing 40 are typically going to be dating women who are the same age, or a few years younger -- i.e. women who themselves are in no position to be judgmental about his age. Glass houses, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In your opinion, if a man is I married, but typical background (college, maybe masters or grad school, healthy dating background) no long trips or absences. At what point do you begin to thing it's that either he doesn't want to be married or is not marriage material?

Strong suspicion at 35, lost cause 40+.

This.

IME, when a man has a lot going for him and is still single over 35, you need to run far! Regardless of the man's delusions and lies, the reason is always something horrendous.

Between ages 19 and 25, I dated a string of smart, very educated, financially successful men with high powered careers. They were between the ages of 35 and 42, and all seemed *amazing* on paper. I used to refer to them as "DGs" -- damaged goods -- when regaling my girlfriends with stories because, to a man, all had serious flaws lurking below the surface that made them utterly unsuitable for anything meaningful. As young as I was, I had all the time in the world, so figuring out each guy's fatal flaw became a highly entertaining game. From being serial cheats to being on medication for major mental problems to having sexuality issues to just outright hating women, each one had a major shortcoming -- and all of them hid their issues very well. I couldn't have cared less because I was looking to be wined and dined, and knew from the get go that I had no intention of being faithful or serious with men that old. Technically I was in a couple of LTRs, but an LTR that you know you are going to end as soon as the guy reaches his expiration date is just different.

I set myself a deadline of 25 to kick the geezers to the curb and find someone my own age for something meaningful. I met DH at 25 and was happily married at 27. My DH was 28 when we married and we are super happy. Now, here's the funny thing. Of the guys I have kept in touch with loosely, some eventually married as their looks started to fade and their penises grew limp, lol. That means they were actually marriage material, right? Nope. None are happily married. In fact, the very virile, tall, super handsome one who liked to fellate other men on business trips while pretending to be straight at all other times is still giving blow jobs behind his wife's back. If his wife had known to give a single 40 year old man the side eye and a "bye Felicia," instead of marrying him, she wouldn't be stuck with a closet homosexual right now.

FWIW, never married women over 35 who look good on paper are bad news too. I have a few dear girlfriends in this category. Awesome friends, but I'd never let a male relative date one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In your opinion, if a man is I married, but typical background (college, maybe masters or grad school, healthy dating background) no long trips or absences. At what point do you begin to thing it's that either he doesn't want to be married or is not marriage material?

Strong suspicion at 35, lost cause 40+.

This.

IME, when a man has a lot going for him and is still single over 35, you need to run far! Regardless of the man's delusions and lies, the reason is always something horrendous.

Between ages 19 and 25, I dated a string of smart, very educated, financially successful men with high powered careers. They were between the ages of 35 and 42, and all seemed *amazing* on paper. I used to refer to them as "DGs" -- damaged goods -- when regaling my girlfriends with stories because, to a man, all had serious flaws lurking below the surface that made them utterly unsuitable for anything meaningful. As young as I was, I had all the time in the world, so figuring out each guy's fatal flaw became a highly entertaining game. From being serial cheats to being on medication for major mental problems to having sexuality issues to just outright hating women, each one had a major shortcoming -- and all of them hid their issues very well. I couldn't have cared less because I was looking to be wined and dined, and knew from the get go that I had no intention of being faithful or serious with men that old. Technically I was in a couple of LTRs, but an LTR that you know you are going to end as soon as the guy reaches his expiration date is just different.

I set myself a deadline of 25 to kick the geezers to the curb and find someone my own age for something meaningful. I met DH at 25 and was happily married at 27. My DH was 28 when we married and we are super happy. Now, here's the funny thing. Of the guys I have kept in touch with loosely, some eventually married as their looks started to fade and their penises grew limp, lol. That means they were actually marriage material, right? Nope. None are happily married. In fact, the very virile, tall, super handsome one who liked to fellate other men on business trips while pretending to be straight at all other times is still giving blow jobs behind his wife's back. If his wife had known to give a single 40 year old man the side eye and a "bye Felicia," instead of marrying him, she wouldn't be stuck with a closet homosexual right now.

FWIW, never married women over 35 who look good on paper are bad news too. I have a few dear girlfriends in this category. Awesome friends, but I'd never let a male relative date one.

There's a difference between dating a guy who's pushing 40 when you are in your 20s, and you "have all the time in the world," and doing the same when you're 35 and essentially in the same boat as he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There's a difference between dating a guy who's pushing 40 when you are in your 20s, and you "have all the time in the world," and doing the same when you're 35 and essentially in the same boat as he is.

How is this relevant to the men being damaged goods?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There's a difference between dating a guy who's pushing 40 when you are in your 20s, and you "have all the time in the world," and doing the same when you're 35 and essentially in the same boat as he is.

How is this relevant to the men being damaged goods?

The point was that it doesn't really matter if some unmarried 40 year old is regarded as "damaged goods" to a 25 year old because it's the over-30 year olds that he will mostly be dating. And most women who are unmarried past 30 are going through the same thing as he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 28, I expect a man to date for the purpose of looking to settle down. Before that it is for everything else but marriage.

By 35 - he is not marriage material.

+1. 35 is APA; not good for making healthy babies.

Yeah, well, DH made three healthy ones with me when he was 42 on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In your opinion, if a man is I married, but typical background (college, maybe masters or grad school, healthy dating background) no long trips or absences. At what point do you begin to thing it's that either he doesn't want to be married or is not marriage material?

Strong suspicion at 35, lost cause 40+.

This.

IME, when a man has a lot going for him and is still single over 35, you need to run far! Regardless of the man's delusions and lies, the reason is always something horrendous.

Between ages 19 and 25, I dated a string of smart, very educated, financially successful men with high powered careers. They were between the ages of 35 and 42, and all seemed *amazing* on paper. I used to refer to them as "DGs" -- damaged goods -- when regaling my girlfriends with stories because, to a man, all had serious flaws lurking below the surface that made them utterly unsuitable for anything meaningful. As young as I was, I had all the time in the world, so figuring out each guy's fatal flaw became a highly entertaining game. From being serial cheats to being on medication for major mental problems to having sexuality issues to just outright hating women, each one had a major shortcoming -- and all of them hid their issues very well. I couldn't have cared less because I was looking to be wined and dined, and knew from the get go that I had no intention of being faithful or serious with men that old. Technically I was in a couple of LTRs, but an LTR that you know you are going to end as soon as the guy reaches his expiration date is just different.

I set myself a deadline of 25 to kick the geezers to the curb and find someone my own age for something meaningful. I met DH at 25 and was happily married at 27. My DH was 28 when we married and we are super happy. Now, here's the funny thing. Of the guys I have kept in touch with loosely, some eventually married as their looks started to fade and their penises grew limp, lol. That means they were actually marriage material, right? Nope. None are happily married. In fact, the very virile, tall, super handsome one who liked to fellate other men on business trips while pretending to be straight at all other times is still giving blow jobs behind his wife's back. If his wife had known to give a single 40 year old man the side eye and a "bye Felicia," instead of marrying him, she wouldn't be stuck with a closet homosexual right now.

FWIW, never married women over 35 who look good on paper are bad news too. I have a few dear girlfriends in this category. Awesome friends, but I'd never let a male relative date one.

You sound angry about something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In your opinion, if a man is I married, but typical background (college, maybe masters or grad school, healthy dating background) no long trips or absences. At what point do you begin to thing it's that either he doesn't want to be married or is not marriage material?

Strong suspicion at 35, lost cause 40+.

This.

IME, when a man has a lot going for him and is still single over 35, you need to run far! Regardless of the man's delusions and lies, the reason is always something horrendous.

Between ages 19 and 25, I dated a string of smart, very educated, financially successful men with high powered careers. They were between the ages of 35 and 42, and all seemed *amazing* on paper. I used to refer to them as "DGs" -- damaged goods -- when regaling my girlfriends with stories because, to a man, all had serious flaws lurking below the surface that made them utterly unsuitable for anything meaningful. As young as I was, I had all the time in the world, so figuring out each guy's fatal flaw became a highly entertaining game. From being serial cheats to being on medication for major mental problems to having sexuality issues to just outright hating women, each one had a major shortcoming -- and all of them hid their issues very well. I couldn't have cared less because I was looking to be wined and dined, and knew from the get go that I had no intention of being faithful or serious with men that old. Technically I was in a couple of LTRs, but an LTR that you know you are going to end as soon as the guy reaches his expiration date is just different.

I set myself a deadline of 25 to kick the geezers to the curb and find someone my own age for something meaningful. I met DH at 25 and was happily married at 27. My DH was 28 when we married and we are super happy. Now, here's the funny thing. Of the guys I have kept in touch with loosely, some eventually married as their looks started to fade and their penises grew limp, lol. That means they were actually marriage material, right? Nope. None are happily married. In fact, the very virile, tall, super handsome one who liked to fellate other men on business trips while pretending to be straight at all other times is still giving blow jobs behind his wife's back. If his wife had known to give a single 40 year old man the side eye and a "bye Felicia," instead of marrying him, she wouldn't be stuck with a closet homosexual right now.

FWIW, never married women over 35 who look good on paper are bad news too. I have a few dear girlfriends in this category. Awesome friends, but I'd never let a male relative date one.

You sound angry about something.

Lol @ you. She doesn't sound angry, but you are definitely very mad right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There's a difference between dating a guy who's pushing 40 when you are in your 20s, and you "have all the time in the world," and doing the same when you're 35 and essentially in the same boat as he is.

How is this relevant to the men being damaged goods?

The point was that it doesn't really matter if some unmarried 40 year old is regarded as "damaged goods" to a 25 year old because it's the over-30 year olds that he will mostly be dating. And most women who are unmarried past 30 are going through the same thing as he is.

Damaged goods don't become undamaged because the person stuck with them is older. Does rotten food become fresh because the person it is served to is hungrier?

You must be one of the closet gay misogynists PP is talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There's a difference between dating a guy who's pushing 40 when you are in your 20s, and you "have all the time in the world," and doing the same when you're 35 and essentially in the same boat as he is.

How is this relevant to the men being damaged goods?

The point was that it doesn't really matter if some unmarried 40 year old is regarded as "damaged goods" to a 25 year old because it's the over-30 year olds that he will mostly be dating. And most women who are unmarried past 30 are going through the same thing as he is.

Damaged goods don't become undamaged because the person stuck with them is older. Does rotten food become fresh because the person it is served to is hungrier?

You must be one of the closet gay misogynists PP is talking about.

I think the point was clear. You just like to argue.

[Anonymous]

What is missing in the discussion is that it is treating all men the same, when we are individuals.

I would argue that someone who is professionally established and healthy is the criteria. Not an arbitrary age limit.

I was in school through my 20's. At that time, I was working very hard -- 14 hour days -- and did not have the time to date.

My life settled down after finishing my PhD (33); I was earning good money, and I was married by 35.

I have a friend that had a chronic medical condition that would probably kill him before he was 45; he did not want to leave a family fatherless, and did not want to risk passing on to children. When he was 35, medical science developed treatment for it. By 37, it was clear the treatment was working. He married at 40.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is missing in the discussion is that it is treating all men the same, when we are individuals.

I would argue that someone who is professionally established and healthy is the criteria. Not an arbitrary age limit.

I was in school through my 20's. At that time, I was working very hard -- 14 hour days -- and did not have the time to date.

My life settled down after finishing my PhD (33); I was earning good money, and I was married by 35.

I have a friend that had a chronic medical condition that would probably kill him before he was 45; he did not want to leave a family fatherless, and did not want to risk passing on to children. When he was 35, medical science developed treatment for it. By 37, it was clear the treatment was working. He married at 40.

It should be obvious that OP and other posters are referring to men who are stable and established, but still unmarried at advanced ages. We all know respectable, hard working men who didn't finish their education until their mid- to late 30s because they pursued graduate and professional degrees. No one expects a broke student who doesn't know which city he'll end up in after a 5-10 year course of study to start a family. But a 35 year old who has been working a good job for 7+ years and isn't unduly short, fat, ugly, or socially anxious is almost always someone who has serious issues in relationships. He might make a good match for a commitment-shy woman who also has issues, but women who are capable of healthy, normal relationships should steer clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There's a difference between dating a guy who's pushing 40 when you are in your 20s, and you "have all the time in the world," and doing the same when you're 35 and essentially in the same boat as he is.

How is this relevant to the men being damaged goods?

The point was that it doesn't really matter if some unmarried 40 year old is regarded as "damaged goods" to a 25 year old because it's the over-30 year olds that he will mostly be dating. And most women who are unmarried past 30 are going through the same thing as he is.

Damaged goods don't become undamaged because the person stuck with them is older. Does rotten food become fresh because the person it is served to is hungrier?

You must be one of the closet gay misogynists PP is talking about.

I think the point was clear. You just like to argue.

NP. I don't get your point either. I think PP's post about damaged goods hurt your feelings.