Dating for 50+ men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

[Anonymous]

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

Hi. Not all geriatric nurses are Asian.

Do you have any more racist stereotypes you need help with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a wealthy man, OR WOMAN.

Fixed that for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

I'm a high earning woman and I think you're wrong here about what is best for YOU. You're much better off just keeping your money separate and sharing only living expenses if you move in with a partner. You don't want to get yourself financially tangled up with an older man. If things don't work out for any number of reasons, you don't want to make it hard for yourself to leave. The only asset you might want to own jointly is a house, and that is fine, otherwise, just don't do it. Downside outweighs upside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

Hi. Not all geriatric nurses are Asian.

Do you have any more racist stereotypes you need help with?

In addition to being racist this poor woman doesn’t know much, in terms of actual facts.

Anyone who views relationships as transactionally as this person does still needs one financially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

I'm a high earning woman and I think you're wrong here about what is best for YOU. You're much better off just keeping your money separate and sharing only living expenses if you move in with a partner. You don't want to get yourself financially tangled up with an older man. If things don't work out for any number of reasons, you don't want to make it hard for yourself to leave. The only asset you might want to own jointly is a house, and that is fine, otherwise, just don't do it. Downside outweighs upside.

I’m not entangling myself with older men. Only date around my own age, as it gives enough time to sync out careers, retirement and financial goals. 40s is new 30s, wheh people still have 20+ years of working career ahead of them. In fact, these are prime earning years. Why would I be with someone approaching 60s who’s scared to death of anything joint with a woman? I get absolutely nothing out such a relationship

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:*and most of his assets are in a trust for his kids.

The real reason old men aren’t worth it.

Such an attractive mindset

No one wants to spend the last 15 of their remaining good years taking care of someone who will not take care of them, either personally or financially. If you’re not going to be there in person AND you’re not going to leave money for that eventual purpose, you are simply mining a younger woman for resources you will never repay. It’s different if you’re married and the remaining spouse has the remaining joint assets to provide for them.

Kind of ironic, coming from a gold digger.

Au contraire. I have millions. That is because I am not stupid.

She's rich and charming.

What a catch!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

I'm a high earning woman and I think you're wrong here about what is best for YOU. You're much better off just keeping your money separate and sharing only living expenses if you move in with a partner. You don't want to get yourself financially tangled up with an older man. If things don't work out for any number of reasons, you don't want to make it hard for yourself to leave. The only asset you might want to own jointly is a house, and that is fine, otherwise, just don't do it. Downside outweighs upside.

I’m not entangling myself with older men. Only date around my own age, as it gives enough time to sync out careers, retirement and financial goals. 40s is new 30s, wheh people still have 20+ years of working career ahead of them. In fact, these are prime earning years. Why would I be with someone approaching 60s who’s scared to death of anything joint with a woman? I get absolutely nothing out such a relationship

It's not being "scared to death of anything joint with a woman" to point out that it has no benefit to the man and significant potential downside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

This board never fails to deliver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

I'm a high earning woman and I think you're wrong here about what is best for YOU. You're much better off just keeping your money separate and sharing only living expenses if you move in with a partner. You don't want to get yourself financially tangled up with an older man. If things don't work out for any number of reasons, you don't want to make it hard for yourself to leave. The only asset you might want to own jointly is a house, and that is fine, otherwise, just don't do it. Downside outweighs upside.

I’m not entangling myself with older men. Only date around my own age, as it gives enough time to sync out careers, retirement and financial goals. 40s is new 30s, wheh people still have 20+ years of working career ahead of them. In fact, these are prime earning years. Why would I be with someone approaching 60s who’s scared to death of anything joint with a woman? I get absolutely nothing out such a relationship

It's not being "scared to death of anything joint with a woman" to point out that it has no benefit to the man and significant potential downside.

I don’t know how it can’t be a benefit to anybody in high COLA area to become nearly in 1 percentile HH income. And not sure what downsides are, if both spouses contribute equally. In fact, a younger female spouse would contribute more towards joint assets over time. You’d children wouldn’t be earning it: she and you would in second marriage. If you divorce either spouse gets 50%, same as if you weren’t married. But if you don’t divorce you get way cushier lifestyle in retirement and a partner

Would love to hear more on downsides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

Your kids should get premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. There should be plenty for them already if you are that wealthy, particular if they are out of college and employed. I'm living my child $5mm+ assets.

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together. Or you can casually date and then die alone helped by an Asian nurse, scared for your income and assets. Your kids will get $10mm instead of $5mm. It's a matter of individual choice.

I'm fine on my 400K/year, but I lived in a marriage with spouse making about same, and lifestyle you get for 800K joint income is not comparable. Not sure how it's not obvious. I don't want to be single in my elderly years, or have a partner who enjoys the benefits of joint income but leaves everything we earned together to his kids. In fact, it's agains the law: you can't leave out your spouse from marital assets

I'm a high earning woman and I think you're wrong here about what is best for YOU. You're much better off just keeping your money separate and sharing only living expenses if you move in with a partner. You don't want to get yourself financially tangled up with an older man. If things don't work out for any number of reasons, you don't want to make it hard for yourself to leave. The only asset you might want to own jointly is a house, and that is fine, otherwise, just don't do it. Downside outweighs upside.

I’m not entangling myself with older men. Only date around my own age, as it gives enough time to sync out careers, retirement and financial goals. 40s is new 30s, wheh people still have 20+ years of working career ahead of them. In fact, these are prime earning years. Why would I be with someone approaching 60s who’s scared to death of anything joint with a woman? I get absolutely nothing out such a relationship

It's not being "scared to death of anything joint with a woman" to point out that it has no benefit to the man and significant potential downside.

I don’t know how it can’t be a benefit to anybody in high COLA area to become nearly in 1 percentile HH income. And not sure what downsides are, if both spouses contribute equally. In fact, a younger female spouse would contribute more towards joint assets over time. You’d children wouldn’t be earning it: she and you would in second marriage. If you divorce either spouse gets 50%, same as if you weren’t married. But if you don’t divorce you get way cushier lifestyle in retirement and a partner

Would love to hear more on downsides.

Why would you do this? I guess if you must, you could move in together. What other joint assets do you need or want? Seems particularly pointless after a certain age, especially if you're never going to have kids together. The happiest silver couple I know dated but never officially moved in together, and when he got sick first, his kids took over in his care. They never comingled estates or anything and she had her own house. Remarriage after a certain age seems like it's significantly more trouble than it's worth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:*and most of his assets are in a trust for his kids.

The real reason old men aren’t worth it.

Such an attractive mindset

No one wants to spend the last 15 of their remaining good years taking care of someone who will not take care of them, either personally or financially. If you’re not going to be there in person AND you’re not going to leave money for that eventual purpose, you are simply mining a younger woman for resources you will never repay. It’s different if you’re married and the remaining spouse has the remaining joint assets to provide for them.

Kind of ironic, coming from a gold digger.

Au contraire. I have millions. That is because I am not stupid.

She's rich and charming.

What a catch!

And she attaches dollar signs to everything, especially relationships. Control Freak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:*and most of his assets are in a trust for his kids.

The real reason old men aren’t worth it.

Such an attractive mindset

No one wants to spend the last 15 of their remaining good years taking care of someone who will not take care of them, either personally or financially. If you’re not going to be there in person AND you’re not going to leave money for that eventual purpose, you are simply mining a younger woman for resources you will never repay. It’s different if you’re married and the remaining spouse has the remaining joint assets to provide for them.

Kind of ironic, coming from a gold digger.

Au contraire. I have millions. That is because I am not stupid.

Yes, I too am a smart, happy, multimillionaire hanging out in the Relationship Forum.

Bon jour.

Well hurrrumpt! I'm a billionaire with inches of 8!
I'm a ripped 6 pack genius too!

You, sir, win the Internet today!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can have a blast dating at 50. I started dating when I was 53 and dated women within ten years (plus or minus) of my age.

If you want to date for a relationship, it works best if you match with women with a similar background (if you have kids in high school and college, stick with women who have kids the same age.)

If you are just in it for an FWB (or for NSA sex), it is even better. Many divorced women are DTF and are not looking for a relationship with you or anyone else.

One bit of advice about this, I made a significant mistake in my first FWB relationship. I thought she (my FWB) wanted to hold hands, cuddle, etc. before and after sex so I would do so with her. I came to find out she only did it because she thought I needed it. She was okay with meeting up just for sex and did not need anyone to hold her hand.

She was busy as a single mom working a demanding professional job. She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.

I had to cut my FWB loose b/c he wanted to get dinner, go to the movies, spend the weekend together. That’s all well and good but I wasn’t looking for a relationship. Sad to see him go but we wanted different things.

Why on earth would you want a 50+ yo man for a FWB situation? I’d see men in their late twenties to thirties personally.

Not sure why would I date a 50+ man in my 40s unless he's into remarrying/long term partnership with cohabitation and merging finances/certain guarantees for me

Why do you want remarriage plus merging finances and "certain guarantees"? If you've already had kids and you have a career, what do you need marriage and financial merge and "guarantees" for?

And what does he get in exchange for providing merged finances and "guarantees" to you? Is your p*ssy really that great?

I would certainly benefit from a marriage to an equal earner (400K+) and at least 15 more years of building a joint life, wealth, joint assets and retirement planning with an equal partner. Of course I would expect being a primary beneficiary to all marital assets in such scenario. A man either should be able to provide it in his 50s (where they are usually at career prime and make about the same as me).

And what does he get out of this?

If you came at me with that deal - and I am that kind of earner - my reaction is "you are primary beneficiary of the marital assets and my kids get shut out? Pfffft, nope." I'm doing just great building wealth and planning my retirement by myself, I don't need to marry "an equal partner" for that.

You may say, why would you marry me if you're not the primary beneficiary of the marital assets? Well, you are clearly not poor and you will have no problem retiring comfortably if we maintain separate finances.

Getting remarried after you are done having kids is all downside for a man, tbh.

SO what do you propose is the equitable thing to do in light of the fact that she will likely outlive him and he will receive her care in od age, while she will need the same but he will not be present to provide it?

Keeping in mind that she also has children, and like you does not want their inheritance jeopardized by an unrelated third party?

Would it be fair to put all pre-marital assets into separate trusts and then leave subsequently accrued marital assets to the surviving spouse?