The mysterious marriage and dating market

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson have been married forever it seems.

Goldie + Kurt are not married but seem to have a solid, long-term relationship.

It all is based on luck.
Not beauty, charm or brains.

It is absolutely not all luck. IME the women who marry best are assertive go-getters with high self esteem and somewhat cutthroat and narcissistic. Then there is another tier of substantive, accomplished women who married medium guys and made it work. I have several friends who are incredible, successful, accomplished people (doctors, entrepreneurs) who do most of the work of parenthood and are the glue keeping their marriage together to guys who earn and contribute less in every way, but who are decedent and faithful and whom they decided to love. This second their are IMO much finer people than the first in every way.

so basically women who don't marry well have no one to blame but themselves. what a bunch of nonsense.

I mean they can definitely also blame the men on the other thread freaking out about the idea that a woman wants to date a man with a decent salary. If that’s the message they’re getting during the dating years I understand how so many people wind up married to underemployed man-children— looking for anything more is portrayed as gold digging.

Totally agree with this. I definitely spent a lot of my 20's feeling like I shouldn't judge a guy by where he went to school, his emotional stability, and/or his job/earning potential. When I finally decided to stop dating guys with untreated addictions who treated me horribly when I was 28, I met my husband who at the time was 33 and making over $200K, went to Harvard, had a lot of earning potential, was in great shape/handsome, and was emotionally available and wanted a marriage/family. I am so happy that I did not settle!

When my daughters are old enough I will definitely let them know that raising your standards is the best way to get a guy. As a woman, I found that I had the best options when I was in great shape (everyone has a different body, but look the best that YOU CAN and do your best to accept/love yourself) and really made dating a priority. It helped that I went to a good school and had a prestigious job, but those factors won't make or break anything. I think that there is nothing wrong with dating around a bit in your 20s, so that you have a good sense of what is out there and what you want. I dated jerks, I dated unemployed guys with zero passion for life and hedgefunders with gambling addictions and by the time I found my husband I knew what I wanted and I knew how to get it. Still, I wish that I learned a little bit earlier to value myself.

[Anonymous]

It’s also about being out there. You go to things and meet people or go online, therefore improving your chances of meeting someone you like. And if you fall down, you get back up. Some people have a better attitude about the numbers game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson have been married forever it seems.

Goldie + Kurt are not married but seem to have a solid, long-term relationship.

It all is based on luck.
Not beauty, charm or brains.

It is absolutely not all luck. IME the women who marry best are assertive go-getters with high self esteem and somewhat cutthroat and narcissistic. Then there is another tier of substantive, accomplished women who married medium guys and made it work. I have several friends who are incredible, successful, accomplished people (doctors, entrepreneurs) who do most of the work of parenthood and are the glue keeping their marriage together to guys who earn and contribute less in every way, but who are decedent and faithful and whom they decided to love. This second their are IMO much finer people than the first in every way.

so basically women who don't marry well have no one to blame but themselves. what a bunch of nonsense.

I mean they can definitely also blame the men on the other thread freaking out about the idea that a woman wants to date a man with a decent salary. If that’s the message they’re getting during the dating years I understand how so many people wind up married to underemployed man-children— looking for anything more is portrayed as gold digging.

Totally agree with this. I definitely spent a lot of my 20's feeling like I shouldn't judge a guy by where he went to school, his emotional stability, and/or his job/earning potential. When I finally decided to stop dating guys with untreated addictions who treated me horribly when I was 28, I met my husband who at the time was 33 and making over $200K, went to Harvard, had a lot of earning potential, was in great shape/handsome, and was emotionally available and wanted a marriage/family. I am so happy that I did not settle!

When my daughters are old enough I will definitely let them know that raising your standards is the best way to get a guy. As a woman, I found that I had the best options when I was in great shape (everyone has a different body, but look the best that YOU CAN and do your best to accept/love yourself) and really made dating a priority. It helped that I went to a good school and had a prestigious job, but those factors won't make or break anything. I think that there is nothing wrong with dating around a bit in your 20s, so that you have a good sense of what is out there and what you want. I dated jerks, I dated unemployed guys with zero passion for life and hedgefunders with gambling addictions and by the time I found my husband I knew what I wanted and I knew how to get it. Still, I wish that I learned a little bit earlier to value myself.

you should cross post to the college forum where people post that every kid will find the school for them and that prestige doesn't matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson have been married forever it seems.

Goldie + Kurt are not married but seem to have a solid, long-term relationship.

It all is based on luck.
Not beauty, charm or brains.

It is absolutely not all luck. IME the women who marry best are assertive go-getters with high self esteem and somewhat cutthroat and narcissistic. Then there is another tier of substantive, accomplished women who married medium guys and made it work. I have several friends who are incredible, successful, accomplished people (doctors, entrepreneurs) who do most of the work of parenthood and are the glue keeping their marriage together to guys who earn and contribute less in every way, but who are decedent and faithful and whom they decided to love. This second their are IMO much finer people than the first in every way.

so basically women who don't marry well have no one to blame but themselves. what a bunch of nonsense.

I mean they can definitely also blame the men on the other thread freaking out about the idea that a woman wants to date a man with a decent salary. If that’s the message they’re getting during the dating years I understand how so many people wind up married to underemployed man-children— looking for anything more is portrayed as gold digging.

Totally agree with this. I definitely spent a lot of my 20's feeling like I shouldn't judge a guy by where he went to school, his emotional stability, and/or his job/earning potential. When I finally decided to stop dating guys with untreated addictions who treated me horribly when I was 28, I met my husband who at the time was 33 and making over $200K, went to Harvard, had a lot of earning potential, was in great shape/handsome, and was emotionally available and wanted a marriage/family. I am so happy that I did not settle!

When my daughters are old enough I will definitely let them know that raising your standards is the best way to get a guy. As a woman, I found that I had the best options when I was in great shape (everyone has a different body, but look the best that YOU CAN and do your best to accept/love yourself) and really made dating a priority. It helped that I went to a good school and had a prestigious job, but those factors won't make or break anything. I think that there is nothing wrong with dating around a bit in your 20s, so that you have a good sense of what is out there and what you want. I dated jerks, I dated unemployed guys with zero passion for life and hedgefunders with gambling addictions and by the time I found my husband I knew what I wanted and I knew how to get it. Still, I wish that I learned a little bit earlier to value myself.

you should cross post to the college forum where people post that every kid will find the school for them and that prestige doesn't matter

I think I'd be flamed! I went to an Ivy for undergrad and grad and finally was comfortable admitting that I wanted my partner to have a similar pedigree. Everyone has different criteria. For me actually being real with myself about what I wanted in a partner helped me find a partner. That's the takeaway that I wanted to convey. Own your preferences! Have realistic expectations for your partner (which means, understand how what you bring to the table will influence the partners you attract) and then own your preferences and go out and date, date, date! And when you find a guy that you like, lock him down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
First off, most men don't care about your job, or your money. So stop leading with that. Men care first and foremost about your looks, if you're friendly and cooperative, and physically in shape. They want to be with women who smile, laugh and make their lives more peaceful instead of being another competitor. Women who treat them with basic civility and respect. If they want children, they are looking for a childless woman who shows signs of being a good, dedicated mother.

I know a lot of men who have left the dating scene because they cannot seem to find women who tick even half these boxes anymore.

These other women have been snapped up because they have tick all of these boxes, or at least most of them. So what are you doing wrong, OP, and how can you change it? Think about what men want.

This. It’s quite simple - Men want women who are pleasant to look at and pleasant to be around.

[Anonymous]

The secret sauce is all about the right person in combination with the right timing.

My DH would not have married me if we had gotten together 10 years earlier. We got together in our 30s.

Neither of us were ready to get married, even to each other in our 20s.

[Anonymous]

Given that intelligence is largely inherited, the best way to have smart kids is to marry someone you meet in a rigorous grad program or workplace. I once worked with a very accomplished guy who married a sweet young thing and when his kids were not smart enough to attend his alma mater he blamed her for producing sub par kids. Don't know how common that is but I imagine that it happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson have been married forever it seems.

Goldie + Kurt are not married but seem to have a solid, long-term relationship.

It all is based on luck.
Not beauty, charm or brains.

It is absolutely not all luck. IME the women who marry best are assertive go-getters with high self esteem and somewhat cutthroat and narcissistic. Then there is another tier of substantive, accomplished women who married medium guys and made it work. I have several friends who are incredible, successful, accomplished people (doctors, entrepreneurs) who do most of the work of parenthood and are the glue keeping their marriage together to guys who earn and contribute less in every way, but who are decedent and faithful and whom they decided to love. This second their are IMO much finer people than the first in every way.

so basically women who don't marry well have no one to blame but themselves. what a bunch of nonsense.

I mean they can definitely also blame the men on the other thread freaking out about the idea that a woman wants to date a man with a decent salary. If that’s the message they’re getting during the dating years I understand how so many people wind up married to underemployed man-children— looking for anything more is portrayed as gold digging.

Totally agree with this. I definitely spent a lot of my 20's feeling like I shouldn't judge a guy by where he went to school, his emotional stability, and/or his job/earning potential. When I finally decided to stop dating guys with untreated addictions who treated me horribly when I was 28, I met my husband who at the time was 33 and making over $200K, went to Harvard, had a lot of earning potential, was in great shape/handsome, and was emotionally available and wanted a marriage/family. I am so happy that I did not settle!

When my daughters are old enough I will definitely let them know that raising your standards is the best way to get a guy. As a woman, I found that I had the best options when I was in great shape (everyone has a different body, but look the best that YOU CAN and do your best to accept/love yourself) and really made dating a priority. It helped that I went to a good school and had a prestigious job, but those factors won't make or break anything. I think that there is nothing wrong with dating around a bit in your 20s, so that you have a good sense of what is out there and what you want. I dated jerks, I dated unemployed guys with zero passion for life and hedgefunders with gambling addictions and by the time I found my husband I knew what I wanted and I knew how to get it. Still, I wish that I learned a little bit earlier to value myself.

you should cross post to the college forum where people post that every kid will find the school for them and that prestige doesn't matter

I think I'd be flamed! I went to an Ivy for undergrad and grad and finally was comfortable admitting that I wanted my partner to have a similar pedigree. Everyone has different criteria. For me actually being real with myself about what I wanted in a partner helped me find a partner. That's the takeaway that I wanted to convey. Own your preferences! Have realistic expectations for your partner (which means, understand how what you bring to the table will influence the partners you attract) and then own your preferences and go out and date, date, date! And when you find a guy that you like, lock him down.

What if the person didn't go Ivy but went to a top-40 school, and then grad school, got a doctorate and then taught at another top-40 school. Then went to a Top-4 consulting firm. Is that good enough to make up for not being Ivy?

My BFF's smitten with a guy like this. He seems like a very sweet guy, but he talks about how his Dad was a plumber and he went on calls with the Dad from third-grade on, and how his Mom was a secretary. He's almost like one of those strivers who knows they're just not QUITE good enough, that they'll never QUITE fit in. He doesn't drink, so he's a bit awkward in social settings. He acts almost like an amateur, like he's never been there if my BFF brings him to have cocktails at a gathering on the harbor. I mean, even if you don't drink, get a club soda with lime or something and try to fit in. And please don't tell us about the type of shower drain you want if you're adding a bathroom in the basement so that you don't get backflooding .

The people who "ascend" above their status often flame out as they get into their upper 30s and 40s because they don't know how to function in the executive suite, boardrooms and other elite settings. They have skills but they're not enjoyable to work with. They accidentally act like know-it-alls and that they're trying to prove themselves, so there's always this insecurity and people want to work with people who are confident.

Whereas when you go to an Ivy, you've been with the best day after day after day, so it's old hat. That's the difference. So long as your parents were able to expose you to good opportunities growing up and so long as you're able to refine your social skills in finals clubs and the like, you've just got a leg up that people who haven't been there just don't understand. I'm afraid my BFF doesn't see that, and then she'll either be stuck in a disappointing marriage in her late 40s or will divorce at a rough age to find someone who can treat her to the living standard she deserves.

[Anonymous]

Some women are good at discerning early on a man's character and what qualities make for a happy successful marriage. These women also seem to have good self-esteem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some women are good at discerning early on a man's character and what qualities make for a happy successful marriage. These women also seem to have good self-esteem.

Maybe, but you also need to know what is right for YOU as a woman. For example, I would much rather be with the son of a plumber than the male version of the poster who needs an Ivy League educated partner. To each his or her own, but you have to know YOU to know what would drive you nuts vs. what helps you out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson have been married forever it seems.

Goldie + Kurt are not married but seem to have a solid, long-term relationship.

It all is based on luck.
Not beauty, charm or brains.

It is absolutely not all luck. IME the women who marry best are assertive go-getters with high self esteem and somewhat cutthroat and narcissistic. Then there is another tier of substantive, accomplished women who married medium guys and made it work. I have several friends who are incredible, successful, accomplished people (doctors, entrepreneurs) who do most of the work of parenthood and are the glue keeping their marriage together to guys who earn and contribute less in every way, but who are decedent and faithful and whom they decided to love. This second their are IMO much finer people than the first in every way.

so basically women who don't marry well have no one to blame but themselves. what a bunch of nonsense.

I mean they can definitely also blame the men on the other thread freaking out about the idea that a woman wants to date a man with a decent salary. If that’s the message they’re getting during the dating years I understand how so many people wind up married to underemployed man-children— looking for anything more is portrayed as gold digging.

Totally agree with this. I definitely spent a lot of my 20's feeling like I shouldn't judge a guy by where he went to school, his emotional stability, and/or his job/earning potential. When I finally decided to stop dating guys with untreated addictions who treated me horribly when I was 28, I met my husband who at the time was 33 and making over $200K, went to Harvard, had a lot of earning potential, was in great shape/handsome, and was emotionally available and wanted a marriage/family. I am so happy that I did not settle!

When my daughters are old enough I will definitely let them know that raising your standards is the best way to get a guy. As a woman, I found that I had the best options when I was in great shape (everyone has a different body, but look the best that YOU CAN and do your best to accept/love yourself) and really made dating a priority. It helped that I went to a good school and had a prestigious job, but those factors won't make or break anything. I think that there is nothing wrong with dating around a bit in your 20s, so that you have a good sense of what is out there and what you want. I dated jerks, I dated unemployed guys with zero passion for life and hedgefunders with gambling addictions and by the time I found my husband I knew what I wanted and I knew how to get it. Still, I wish that I learned a little bit earlier to value myself.

you should cross post to the college forum where people post that every kid will find the school for them and that prestige doesn't matter

I think I'd be flamed! I went to an Ivy for undergrad and grad and finally was comfortable admitting that I wanted my partner to have a similar pedigree. Everyone has different criteria. For me actually being real with myself about what I wanted in a partner helped me find a partner. That's the takeaway that I wanted to convey. Own your preferences! Have realistic expectations for your partner (which means, understand how what you bring to the table will influence the partners you attract) and then own your preferences and go out and date, date, date! And when you find a guy that you like, lock him down.

What if the person didn't go Ivy but went to a top-40 school, and then grad school, got a doctorate and then taught at another top-40 school. Then went to a Top-4 consulting firm. Is that good enough to make up for not being Ivy?

My BFF's smitten with a guy like this. He seems like a very sweet guy, but he talks about how his Dad was a plumber and he went on calls with the Dad from third-grade on, and how his Mom was a secretary. He's almost like one of those strivers who knows they're just not QUITE good enough, that they'll never QUITE fit in. He doesn't drink, so he's a bit awkward in social settings. He acts almost like an amateur, like he's never been there if my BFF brings him to have cocktails at a gathering on the harbor. I mean, even if you don't drink, get a club soda with lime or something and try to fit in. And please don't tell us about the type of shower drain you want if you're adding a bathroom in the basement so that you don't get backflooding .

The people who "ascend" above their status often flame out as they get into their upper 30s and 40s because they don't know how to function in the executive suite, boardrooms and other elite settings. They have skills but they're not enjoyable to work with. They accidentally act like know-it-alls and that they're trying to prove themselves, so there's always this insecurity and people want to work with people who are confident.

Whereas when you go to an Ivy, you've been with the best day after day after day, so it's old hat. That's the difference. So long as your parents were able to expose you to good opportunities growing up and so long as you're able to refine your social skills in finals clubs and the like, you've just got a leg up that people who haven't been there just don't understand. I'm afraid my BFF doesn't see that, and then she'll either be stuck in a disappointing marriage in her late 40s or will divorce at a rough age to find someone who can treat her to the living standard she deserves.

Sweet Jesus. Is this what the Ivy League produces? This is the wisdom of the best of the best?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Like the famous poster says, "The common element in all of your failed relationships is you."


If a guy complained about how all the girls he dated turned out to be gold diggers, or BSC, or cheaters, or alcoholics, etc... what would you say?

I think the reasonable advice would be, "maybe prioritize finding a stable well adjusted person -first-, then start working down the rest of your list."

There are tons of good quality single men and women who would make wonderful spouses out there looking for the same.

If you can't find one and always seem to end up with a disaster you are either, a disaster yourself (the people you want will avoid you) or you aren't doing enough to avoid the wrong people.

Take your time getting to know someone before getting into a relationship. Pay attention to warning signs early on. If they seem crazy, or hyper-critical, etc, it will only get worse.

I personally made this mistake twice, beautiful, intelligent, exciting, fun, flaky girls... who turned out to be absolute lunatics, hard drugs in one case and just plain nuts in the other. Experiences bad enough to make me lose any interest in their type.

Assume bad boys/bros/serial hookups aren't going to change.

Assume women who try to figure out your financial status at the outset of a relationship are cancer.

If your first couple dates involve drinking, try a couple dates without alcohol.

Pay attention to how people speak about others who are not present. If someone is always trashing their coworkers/friends/family/exs/etc, bail.

Values and core personality traits are relative constants. Looks, incomes, hobbies/interests, etc, change.

On the day after we got married in our mid-/early-twenties (respectively) we sat down and worked through our finances. We had ~$5k between us, no CC debt, but a negative net worth if you account for student loans.

Life has given us so much more than we could have asked for. We have a loving relationship, healthy children, and yes, high earning jobs and nice things.

We both married someone with ambition, values, a work ethic, and a willingness to put up with their partner's flaws.


Blah blah blah, OP, if I can give you one sentence to remember:

Look for a good person. Don't try to find out what they make, find out who they are.

Best advice, hands down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of it is timing, luck and circumstance but sitting here at age 45 and reflecting back and seeing which amazing women I know that never found the right partner, the common denominator was this:

They spent time in dead end relationships at ages 22-28. Maybe I get flamed for this but those are the peak dating years for women, and after that the supply of good, eligible men shrinks dramatically and the ones that are left (attractive, successful men in their early 30s) rule the dating market and date younger.

Totally agree with this. This is your window. Treat dating seriously as your other full time job during this time and be picky - don’t settle and don’t date just to have fun. Don’t waste time on losers.

I hate to agree but I do. If you wait longer you may not need a man and be o.e unable to compromise your life. Marriage takes compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tom Hanks & Rita Wilson have been married forever it seems.

Goldie + Kurt are not married but seem to have a solid, long-term relationship.

It all is based on luck.
Not beauty, charm or brains.

It is absolutely not all luck. IME the women who marry best are assertive go-getters with high self esteem and somewhat cutthroat and narcissistic. Then there is another tier of substantive, accomplished women who married medium guys and made it work. I have several friends who are incredible, successful, accomplished people (doctors, entrepreneurs) who do most of the work of parenthood and are the glue keeping their marriage together to guys who earn and contribute less in every way, but who are decedent and faithful and whom they decided to love. This second their are IMO much finer people than the first in every way.

so basically women who don't marry well have no one to blame but themselves. what a bunch of nonsense.

I mean they can definitely also blame the men on the other thread freaking out about the idea that a woman wants to date a man with a decent salary. If that’s the message they’re getting during the dating years I understand how so many people wind up married to underemployed man-children— looking for anything more is portrayed as gold digging.

Totally agree with this. I definitely spent a lot of my 20's feeling like I shouldn't judge a guy by where he went to school, his emotional stability, and/or his job/earning potential. When I finally decided to stop dating guys with untreated addictions who treated me horribly when I was 28, I met my husband who at the time was 33 and making over $200K, went to Harvard, had a lot of earning potential, was in great shape/handsome, and was emotionally available and wanted a marriage/family. I am so happy that I did not settle!

When my daughters are old enough I will definitely let them know that raising your standards is the best way to get a guy. As a woman, I found that I had the best options when I was in great shape (everyone has a different body, but look the best that YOU CAN and do your best to accept/love yourself) and really made dating a priority. It helped that I went to a good school and had a prestigious job, but those factors won't make or break anything. I think that there is nothing wrong with dating around a bit in your 20s, so that you have a good sense of what is out there and what you want. I dated jerks, I dated unemployed guys with zero passion for life and hedgefunders with gambling addictions and by the time I found my husband I knew what I wanted and I knew how to get it. Still, I wish that I learned a little bit earlier to value myself.

you should cross post to the college forum where people post that every kid will find the school for them and that prestige doesn't matter

I think I'd be flamed! I went to an Ivy for undergrad and grad and finally was comfortable admitting that I wanted my partner to have a similar pedigree. Everyone has different criteria. For me actually being real with myself about what I wanted in a partner helped me find a partner. That's the takeaway that I wanted to convey. Own your preferences! Have realistic expectations for your partner (which means, understand how what you bring to the table will influence the partners you attract) and then own your preferences and go out and date, date, date! And when you find a guy that you like, lock him down.

What if the person didn't go Ivy but went to a top-40 school, and then grad school, got a doctorate and then taught at another top-40 school. Then went to a Top-4 consulting firm. Is that good enough to make up for not being Ivy?

My BFF's smitten with a guy like this. He seems like a very sweet guy, but he talks about how his Dad was a plumber and he went on calls with the Dad from third-grade on, and how his Mom was a secretary. He's almost like one of those strivers who knows they're just not QUITE good enough, that they'll never QUITE fit in. He doesn't drink, so he's a bit awkward in social settings. He acts almost like an amateur, like he's never been there if my BFF brings him to have cocktails at a gathering on the harbor. I mean, even if you don't drink, get a club soda with lime or something and try to fit in. And please don't tell us about the type of shower drain you want if you're adding a bathroom in the basement so that you don't get backflooding .

The people who "ascend" above their status often flame out as they get into their upper 30s and 40s because they don't know how to function in the executive suite, boardrooms and other elite settings. They have skills but they're not enjoyable to work with. They accidentally act like know-it-alls and that they're trying to prove themselves, so there's always this insecurity and people want to work with people who are confident.

Whereas when you go to an Ivy, you've been with the best day after day after day, so it's old hat. That's the difference. So long as your parents were able to expose you to good opportunities growing up and so long as you're able to refine your social skills in finals clubs and the like, you've just got a leg up that people who haven't been there just don't understand. I'm afraid my BFF doesn't see that, and then she'll either be stuck in a disappointing marriage in her late 40s or will divorce at a rough age to find someone who can treat her to the living standard she deserves.

Sweet Jesus. Is this what the Ivy League produces? This is the wisdom of the best of the best?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of it is timing, luck and circumstance but sitting here at age 45 and reflecting back and seeing which amazing women I know that never found the right partner, the common denominator was this:

They spent time in dead end relationships at ages 22-28. Maybe I get flamed for this but those are the peak dating years for women, and after that the supply of good, eligible men shrinks dramatically and the ones that are left (attractive, successful men in their early 30s) rule the dating market and date younger.

Totally agree with this. This is your window. Treat dating seriously as your other full time job during this time and be picky - don’t settle and don’t date just to have fun. Don’t waste time on losers.

I hate to agree but I do. If you wait longer you may not need a man and be o.e unable to compromise your life. Marriage takes compromise.