Single men in 50s - what are you looking for when dating?

[Anonymous]

Middle aged divorced man here. I never made it past a first date with a stay at home mom. They're almost always boring to me. I prefer women with real careers, even if they don't make much money. (I have my own money.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off the top of my head:

- in good physical shape - she takes care of herself
- emotional maturity - not still hung up on the past, willing to be vulnerable herself and accepting of me
- kids at similar stage
- financial independence
- some common interests

How come chemistry that’s mentioned so often by men is not on the list?

I'm PP. Chemistry definitely matters but there's not much a woman can do about that. Well, she should be sexual, enjoy sex. But that still doesn't mean there will be chemistry with any given person. On the other hand, realizing lightening strike right off the bat is generally a bad predictor of a good relationship and realizing that sometimes chemistry takes time to develop are important things she can control. Part of being emotionally mature.

Btw, re fitness, I'm much more attracted to women who age gracefully while remaining feminine than ones who have a bunch of surgery and injections, on the one hand, or who give in to the practicalities of being a suburban mom 24/7 on the other hand.

Why is instant attraction a bad predictor of a good relationship ?

Because it usually reflects the familiarity of intense but dysfunctional past relationships, especially with a parent. Tons of literature on this. Do your homework.

I don’t know. I have great relationship with my parents . To me as a woman it chemistry is not there (and I know by date 2), it never grows

And you have a history of successful romantic relationships?

Strong instant chemistry can also cloud your ability to see serious problems.

E.g. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mindful-dating/202212/when-red-flags-feel-like-home/amp

Of course I do. I was with one partner for 19 years. It eventually ended but first 13 years were actually happy. It’s a good history given that average marriage duration in the US is 7 years

A failed marriage is excellent evidence of a dysfunctional relationship. A failure to get married and into a "partnership" or whatever you called your 19-year relationship is yet more evidence.

Your seven-year figure may have been true at one point, but it's not true today. With lower rates of marriage, marriages last longer.

Well, most men who are dating in their 50s are also divorced, and had much shorter marriages.
It’s just read what you quote: chemistry takes a long time for you to develop. But it’s not ok for women to delay sex. So you sleep with all the women you meet, and see with whom you eventually develop chemistry? Then men tend to bkake women who slept too soon as being immature or so..ts.
I as a woman don’t need to jump through all the hoops to recognize chemistry. Seems like you are trying to avoid relationships and commitments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off the top of my head:

- in good physical shape - she takes care of herself
- emotional maturity - not still hung up on the past, willing to be vulnerable herself and accepting of me
- kids at similar stage
- financial independence
- some common interests

How come chemistry that’s mentioned so often by men is not on the list?

I'm PP. Chemistry definitely matters but there's not much a woman can do about that. Well, she should be sexual, enjoy sex. But that still doesn't mean there will be chemistry with any given person. On the other hand, realizing lightening strike right off the bat is generally a bad predictor of a good relationship and realizing that sometimes chemistry takes time to develop are important things she can control. Part of being emotionally mature.

Btw, re fitness, I'm much more attracted to women who age gracefully while remaining feminine than ones who have a bunch of surgery and injections, on the one hand, or who give in to the practicalities of being a suburban mom 24/7 on the other hand.

Why is instant attraction a bad predictor of a good relationship ?

Because it usually reflects the familiarity of intense but dysfunctional past relationships, especially with a parent. Tons of literature on this. Do your homework.

I don’t know. I have great relationship with my parents . To me as a woman it chemistry is not there (and I know by date 2), it never grows

And you have a history of successful romantic relationships?

Strong instant chemistry can also cloud your ability to see serious problems.

E.g. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mindful-dating/202212/when-red-flags-feel-like-home/amp

Of course I do. I was with one partner for 19 years. It eventually ended but first 13 years were actually happy. It’s a good history given that average marriage duration in the US is 7 years

A failed marriage is excellent evidence of a dysfunctional relationship. A failure to get married and into a "partnership" or whatever you called your 19-year relationship is yet more evidence.

Your seven-year figure may have been true at one point, but it's not true today. With lower rates of marriage, marriages last longer.

Well, most men who are dating in their 50s are also divorced, and had much shorter marriages.
It’s just read what you quote: chemistry takes a long time for you to develop. But it’s not ok for women to delay sex. So you sleep with all the women you meet, and see with whom you eventually develop chemistry? Then men tend to bkake women who slept too soon as being immature or so..ts.
I as a woman don’t need to jump through all the hoops to recognize chemistry. Seems like you are trying to avoid relationships and commitments

I'm the PP who wrote about chemistry. I did not write the post you're immediately responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Skinny
Pretty
Under 40

Do you find a lot of women that want to date people 20 years older than them?

I'm a different 50 something male poster. Most women 20 years younger than me have no interest in me, but some do. I'm not taking about sugar babies or gold diggers. I'm talking about smart women with careers who want an emotional and sexual connection. Women my own age are sometimes skeptical that these 30 something women exist, but they do. Being with these younger women can be a little awkward, mostly because so many older women hate them, but the difference in life experience also can be challenging sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Middle aged divorced man here. I never made it past a first date with a stay at home mom. They're almost always boring to me. I prefer women with real careers, even if they don't make much money. (I have my own money.)

I have money, but never had a career. I was never a SAHM. What made them boring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Off the top of my head:

- in good physical shape - she takes care of herself
- emotional maturity - not still hung up on the past, willing to be vulnerable herself and accepting of me
- kids at similar stage
- financial independence
- some common interests

How come chemistry that’s mentioned so often by men is not on the list?

I'm PP. Chemistry definitely matters but there's not much a woman can do about that. Well, she should be sexual, enjoy sex. But that still doesn't mean there will be chemistry with any given person. On the other hand, realizing lightening strike right off the bat is generally a bad predictor of a good relationship and realizing that sometimes chemistry takes time to develop are important things she can control. Part of being emotionally mature.

Different PP, I agree. For me, chemistry takes a while to develop. Rare for me to have a definite feeling of "no chemistry" right off the bat in a first face-to-face meeting, though this appears to be common with women.

You and PP are talking about different things 1. PP said that instant chemistry is a bad predictor of a LTR . As a woman, I wonder why is that the case for men? 2. Second type of chemistry - the one that’s built over time. Of course, it can grow.

But my question was why 2) is a better start for a good relationship than the 1)? Aren’t men the one who value instant chemistry, soon sex etc.?

Men don't need any chemistry at all for sex or to want it soon, lmao.

[Anonymous]

i thought op was asking men to respond. these are almost all women responses. women don't know when to shut up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i thought op was asking men to respond. these are almost all women responses. women don't know when to shut up.

It's a law of nature that every DCUM Relationships "men, what do you think?" post will primarily be answered by women saying "here's what men should think!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Middle aged divorced man here. I never made it past a first date with a stay at home mom. They're almost always boring to me. I prefer women with real careers, even if they don't make much money. (I have my own money.)

I have money, but never had a career. I was never a SAHM. What made them boring?

I guess I found them lacking in goals and drive. I realize those are qualities most women expect in men, but most men don't want them in women. I expect them in women. Child raising, vacation plans, hobbies, art and culture, and politics are all interesting topics, but I like to hear about a woman's new book, or her own art show, or her interesting litigation case, or her patients, or the new technology she's developing, or the students she's teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Middle aged divorced man here. I never made it past a first date with a stay at home mom. They're almost always boring to me. I prefer women with real careers, even if they don't make much money. (I have my own money.)

I have money, but never had a career. I was never a SAHM. What made them boring?

I guess I found them lacking in goals and drive.

The goal and drive I'm looking for is "wants to get it on with me frequently".

[Anonymous]

If woman knows DCUM, that will be a hard stop for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If woman knows DCUM, that will be a hard stop for me.

Do you ask?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Middle aged divorced man here. I never made it past a first date with a stay at home mom. They're almost always boring to me. I prefer women with real careers, even if they don't make much money. (I have my own money.)

I have money, but never had a career. I was never a SAHM. What made them boring?

I guess I found them lacking in goals and drive. I realize those are qualities most women expect in men, but most men don't want them in women. I expect them in women. Child raising, vacation plans, hobbies, art and culture, and politics are all interesting topics, but I like to hear about a woman's new book, or her own art show, or her interesting litigation case, or her patients, or the new technology she's developing, or the students she's teaching.

I guess as a woman I have a hard case with these. I work but avoid discussing finances and career at first. If I do they’ll find out I’m developing an apartment complex in Bosnia and that’s unsexy IMHO. Totally contrary to my looks and educational background. They also wonder where the money is coming from. Some thought I was a high paid hooker,

[Anonymous]

So 50+ men do highly value financial independence in women. That’s an opposite of opinion expressed so many times on this forum that men mostly value other qualities and not the woman’s career.

[Anonymous]

I have had success with fat women. They are far easier to date.