Don't Let a Guy Waste Your Most Eligible Years

[Anonymous]

Completely agree OP. There are too many women I know who wasted as much as a decade on a schmuck or two. If he is not dicussing marriage after a year, time to move on.

And stop living with them! If you are going to move in together, have a shared lease, both names on utilities and split the deposit. Make it real, not real easy...on him.

In fact stop making everything so easy for the guys. Men hardly have to work at it anymore. Ladies have some pride.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men will not want to commit to marriage/family until they are financially secure. So this takes longer often until 30's nowadays. Women do not have this excuse. If a woman is 35 and single, she failed to attract a commitment from a high-quality man for at least the last 10 years. That's a red flag.

huh? perhaps they need a stable job but vast majority of men worth marrying have one by age 30.

PP means that men need not just a secure, well-paying job, but savings (not just 401k, but savings account/down payment/emergency fund). Getting those last three up in particular takes time, not to mention wedding expenses, engagement ring, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
this is actually not that important (even if true). the key issue here is that, after one is 35, the quality of available men becomes absolutely terrible. it's not about women not looking that good or not being attractive, it's that men who are single at that point are, basically, garbage - either guys whom nobody wanted or guys who have one or another major somewhat hidden issue.

i am 42, married for a long time, and when i look around i think every single guy i ever had even a minor crush on is married with kids. there basically nobody left that i would have interest in if i had to look around. good stuff moves fast.

LOL, does Amal Amaluddin know that?

She's certainly smart enough to know.

She's drop dead gorgeous and incredibly wealthy. Normal rules don't apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed!

I have a 36 year old girlfriend down in the dumps because her (same aged) boyfriend "isn't sure" about marriage and children. She spent her twenties and thirties partying and now she has nothing to show for it.

I know you will probably get flamed (hard) for this, but I agree with you wholeheartedly.

She probably also blew off several good guys. Just desserts?

Sour grapes?

Just desserts...it's one of those dating gigs where people can get together and just cram their faces with cakes and cookies. It totally takes the pressure off the dating scene. It's how DH and I met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
this is actually not that important (even if true). the key issue here is that, after one is 35, the quality of available men becomes absolutely terrible. it's not about women not looking that good or not being attractive, it's that men who are single at that point are, basically, garbage - either guys whom nobody wanted or guys who have one or another major somewhat hidden issue.

i am 42, married for a long time, and when i look around i think every single guy i ever had even a minor crush on is married with kids. there basically nobody left that i would have interest in if i had to look around. good stuff moves fast.

LOL, does Amal Amaluddin know that?

She's certainly smart enough to know.

Worked out for her - to not marry till late thirties, and to marry one of the "rejects" by age in your book.

according to blind gossip, george clooney is gay, and has among many others, had affair with rande gerber (cindy crawford's husband). he is also pretty old and pretty dumb. that she would go for him actually kind of supports the idea that good men her age were not available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most girls I know want to have "adventures" in their twenties, early thirties (by that I mean travel, partying, changing careers, dating lots of different guys, etc.). They don't even want to *think* about marriage until 32-33. Seems valid to me (a man).

That's feminist brainwashing. Those attitudes must be mocked and, if necessary, beaten out of them, for the good of society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
this is actually not that important (even if true). the key issue here is that, after one is 35, the quality of available men becomes absolutely terrible. it's not about women not looking that good or not being attractive, it's that men who are single at that point are, basically, garbage - either guys whom nobody wanted or guys who have one or another major somewhat hidden issue.

i am 42, married for a long time, and when i look around i think every single guy i ever had even a minor crush on is married with kids. there basically nobody left that i would have interest in if i had to look around. good stuff moves fast.

LOL, does Amal Amaluddin know that?

She's certainly smart enough to know.

She's drop dead gorgeous and incredibly wealthy. Normal rules don't apply.

Nothing incredible about her wealth, a dime a dozen in central London.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men will not want to commit to marriage/family until they are financially secure. So this takes longer often until 30's nowadays. Women do not have this excuse. If a woman is 35 and single, she failed to attract a commitment from a high-quality man for at least the last 10 years. That's a red flag.

huh? perhaps they need a stable job but vast majority of men worth marrying have one by age 30.

PP means that men need not just a secure, well-paying job, but savings (not just 401k, but savings account/down payment/emergency fund). Getting those last three up in particular takes time, not to mention wedding expenses, engagement ring, etc.

Exactly. Heard of student loans?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
this is actually not that important (even if true). the key issue here is that, after one is 35, the quality of available men becomes absolutely terrible. it's not about women not looking that good or not being attractive, it's that men who are single at that point are, basically, garbage - either guys whom nobody wanted or guys who have one or another major somewhat hidden issue.

i am 42, married for a long time, and when i look around i think every single guy i ever had even a minor crush on is married with kids. there basically nobody left that i would have interest in if i had to look around. good stuff moves fast.

LOL, does Amal Amaluddin know that?

She's certainly smart enough to know.

She's drop dead gorgeous and incredibly wealthy. Normal rules don't apply.

Nothing incredible about her wealth, a dime a dozen in central London.

Yeah I don't know. I mean George Clooney is 54 years old and there's a 16 yr age gap. If he was 40 years sure..but I'm not really sure he's "that eligible a bachelor frankly as maybe a younger movie star. Even if he has preserved his looks and is rich. So I do think Amal Amaluddin did have to "settle" in a way.

[Anonymous]

Er, George Clooney does have a major hidden issue. Apparently it's okay with her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ladies: if you are interested in getting married, you need to be well aware of the fact that you are probably most attractive sometime in your mid- to late-twenties. This means that your mid- to late-twenties are the years in which you are most likely to attract the highest quality man you can get. And while maximizing your attractiveness is key, it all counts for nothing if you aren't single when the right guy comes along, or if you aren't putting yourself out there because you are involved with someone who is only half-committed to you. So in addition to looking your best, you need to make sure you aren't spending time in dead-end relationships.

Time and time again I see or hear about girls who allow a guy to date them for three or four years in their twenties without proposing. This blows my mind. I understand that these girls are holding out in the hope of eventually getting a proposal, but they don't give enough consideration to the possibility that they'll be strung along for another two or three years, only to have him decide that he wants someone else - or worse yet, someone younger. Combine this with a girl's reduced odds of finding someone (let alone someone better) once she begins to age and things begin to fall into perspective; it seems crazy to consider dating someone for more than a year without a very strong confidence about the direction in which the relationship is heading.

Ladies: don't give a guy your most eligible years with nothing to show for it. This is bullshit. If you ultimately want to get married and your current relationship isn't constantly growing stronger (i.e. approaching something permanent), then you need to start asking questions. And if you aren't getting satisfactory answers, it is time to look elsewhere. The clock is ticking.

Furthermore, your time is your responsibility - not his. For better or worse, men will not make commitments that aren't required of them. If he isn't taking things to the next level when you think it is appropriate, break up with him. You can do this nicely, and you should explain your reasoning clearly, but you should still break up with him. More easily said than done? Probably. But it is the best move nonetheless. If he really wants you, he will try to get you back; but if he doesn't, remember: during your most eligible years, you are better off being back on the market than tied up in a dead-end relationship.

100% agree with this. I publicly cringed when Princeton mom came out, but privately agreed with her...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This post reflects some fucked up notions about a woman's value. As if physical beauty is the beginning and end of what she has to offer. As if it's a good idea for her to "lock in" a life time with a guy who wouldn't want to be with her if she met him in her 30s. As if it's illegal for her to propose.

Date someone who is kind to you. If you love them, marry them. If they don't want to get married & you do, move on to someone else who is kind to you. Repeat as necessary.

sometimes it's important to be realistic and get off the soapbox. for me my 20s = time, carefree life, and opportunities. 30s = career building, health challenges for me and my parents, and new priorities. i was glad to have met someone, made a commitment to each other, and married before 30. i have VERY few single gfs left. 2 of them are my sisters in law. they all have two things in common: they are increasingly picky as they age, and they are becoming much more set in their ways and not very flexible. i'm curious to see what shakes out for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This post reflects some fucked up notions about a woman's value. As if physical beauty is the beginning and end of what she has to offer. As if it's a good idea for her to "lock in" a life time with a guy who wouldn't want to be with her if she met him in her 30s. As if it's illegal for her to propose.

Date someone who is kind to you. If you love them, marry them. If they don't want to get married & you do, move on to someone else who is kind to you. Repeat as necessary.

It's pretty naive to say this is just about beauty as a woman's value. It's about a woman knowing what she wants. My friend is wasting her time with her boyfriend because he's made it clear he's nowhere near ready to get married even though they've been together for 6 years. She'll be 30 in 2 months. She has ALWAYS wanted to be married and have kids before she's 35. She's made that clear to him numerous times. She loves him and keeps hoping he will magically be ready. It's hard to just dump someone after spending so much time with them. But its also unfair to her. Her boyfriend knows what she wants and yet won't give it to her by either proposing or breaking up with her. She won't propose because she knows that's not what he wants.

Now let's say they break up next year when she's 31. That gives her 4 years to meet someone, get married, and have kids. Her market of finding guys that are going to be great is smaller since 30 is around the age that the number of eligible people really begins to drop off.

Sure, it would be nice if it was as easy as "move on to someone else" but the reality is moving on after a certain number of years is pretty damn hard.

THIS!

My college bf and I broke up at 24. While upsetting, this was not overly daunting at the time because of all the opportunities to still meet people: grad school being the main one. I'm married now, but I think it would be REALLY hard to meet someone now at 30. School mixers are no more. Professional happy hours are for networking, not dating. No single girlfriends to go out with after work to bars and meet guys, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I respectfully disagree with your logic OP.

Here's why:

You are implying that a woman's looks begin to go downhill somewhere in her late 20's. For some, this may be true but no women should ever feel like her chances for meeting a man get slimmer the more she ages. Women in their 20's are still trying to figure life out as well as form their own unique identities at this stage. No one should feel as if their best years are so temporary.

While in theory, I agree that a woman should date Mr. Right vs. Mr. Right Now. No one can argue this fact. But the 20's are not the time to start planning marriage and foreverness if you can help it.

The twenties are a time to enjoy one's youth. To live a care-free existence and get to know one's self. Most people do not see themselves getting hitched until their 30's anyway.

By the way, there are tons of women who look prettier as they age. I.e., Jennifer Lopez, Beyonce, Jessica Simpson to name a few.

plastic surgery, trainer to the stars, makeup artist to the stars, hair cut and colored by the best of the best.

get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one should feel as if their best years are so temporary.

But they are. Your entire life can't be composed of your best years.

Agreed. My best years for physical looks were my 20s. My best career years were my 30s, etc. And that is ok!