How hard to find a 1/2 time boyfriend in early 40s?

[Anonymous]

OP, this is you shortly after your divorce

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/788867.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an older divorced female. I have a FWB and he is TEN years younger and fantastic in bed. We always use condoms. Good luck!

This. If you’re reasonably attractive you can have your pick of FWB’s. Just focusing on that one purpose allows you to zero in on guys who you really find hot/attractive. I’ve had the same FWB for about 5 months. I met him on one of the dating apps. He’s a fireman and has a schedule where he’ll be on duty for 3-4 days in a row and then off entirely. It lines up pretty well for when I don’t have the kid. We’re both in agreement that we’re not interested in anything more than fun. Honestly, I’m having sex of my life. He’s really hot and very “gifted”.

Question ladies does this mean condom with BJs? I am naive but I am assume STDs can be had through oral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, this is you shortly after your divorce

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/788867.page

OP here: Absolutely not. I have a moving on problem. I was never in love with my spouse. I was in love twice before and the second one broke me. I did not fall in love again and should never have married. I will not fall in love and will never want to introduce anyone to my family. Done with all of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, this is you shortly after your divorce

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/788867.page

OP here: Absolutely not. I have a moving on problem. I was never in love with my spouse. I was in love twice before and the second one broke me. I did not fall in love again and should never have married. I will not fall in love and will never want to introduce anyone to my family. Done with all of that.

You know you’ll have to put on some charm to attract even a half time BF, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, this is you shortly after your divorce

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/788867.page

OP here: Absolutely not. I have a moving on problem. I was never in love with my spouse. I was in love twice before and the second one broke me. I did not fall in love again and should never have married. I will not fall in love and will never want to introduce anyone to my family. Done with all of that.

You know you’ll have to put on some charm to attract even a half time BF, right?

I do not think attracting one will be too hard. All you need is one. And I am not looking for something serious. I’ve had offers over the years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, this is you shortly after your divorce

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/788867.page

OP here: Absolutely not. I have a moving on problem. I was never in love with my spouse. I was in love twice before and the second one broke me. I did not fall in love again and should never have married. I will not fall in love and will never want to introduce anyone to my family. Done with all of that.

Why did you marry if you were never in love with your husband? What did the second one do to you? It seems that you haven't recovered from whatever hurt the second one caused, and perhaps you carry it with you into this marriage. I wonder if some therapy can help resuscitate your marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m the PP who has this exact arrangement. I doubt I found a unicorn, I’m sure there are plenty of other “quality” guys out there who are busy with work and raising their kids, who also have no desire to remarry but want someone to hang out with and sleep with. Just because people are exclusive and monogamous doesn’t mean they are falling in love or moving toward marriage or cohabitation. There can be fun, companionship and sex without deeper feelings. I think the married folks are having a hard time understanding this.

How do you know what your supposedly exclusive relationship is actually doing on the days when he's not spending time with you, which presumably, is the vast majority of the time?

I don't think you've found a "unicorn" either.

You may have found someone 1) who is actually looking for a further, deeper commitment; 2) isn't actually exclusive with you; 3) doesn't have any other options--yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here: I am not divorced. I want a divorce. I never want another man to meet my children. I will never live with a man or commingle my finances ever again. I would like to once in awhile get some action but not involve my kids ever. I would think some divorced men would never want to marry again and seek a similar arrangement. Would not have to last forever. I think it is possible but I think it would be hard to find...I am not ever seeking a full time full out relationship. Annoying at the suggestion I would wait until kids go to college. Um, no. Marriage was the biggest mistake of my life, I’ve waited far too long, and any action would be better then the sexless marriage I have had (many many years...most of the marriage without it).

That's all well and good.

Why do you think any man willing to involve himself with you should agree to exclusivity with you, and even if he did, why do you think that kind of "promise" would be worth anything at all?

Does it make you feel better if you have the illusion of exclusivity?

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think its quite possible to find what you are looking for. Back when I was single, in fact, I dated a guy who wanted what you want--stable, monogamous but not too serious. He was just not interested in marriage or in sharing all of his life, but liked companionship, sex, etc.

I think the real issue is that this kind of relationship can last a while-maybe a couple years--but usually fade for one reason or another--either the desirability dwindles without the corresponding increase in intimacy that makes up for same old same; someone wants more either from partner or someone else; you meet someone more exciting. But if you want sex, companionship but limited relationship, you should be able to find it, for a while.

"
Defining "exclusivity" to include "until I meet someone better than you, or maybe just until I get tired of you" is a peculiar definition of exclusivity, since "until I meet someone better than you/get tired of you" could be tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: I am not divorced. I want a divorce. I never want another man to meet my children. I will never live with a man or commingle my finances ever again. I would like to once in awhile get some action but not involve my kids ever. I would think some divorced men would never want to marry again and seek a similar arrangement. Would not have to last forever. I think it is possible but I think it would be hard to find...I am not ever seeking a full time full out relationship. Annoying at the suggestion I would wait until kids go to college. Um, no. Marriage was the biggest mistake of my life, I’ve waited far too long, and any action would be better then the sexless marriage I have had (many many years...most of the marriage without it).

With all due respect, you're not in a situation to discuss your long-term interests, you're saying what you're able to consider now. Anybody can find short term fb and you can too. Beyond that, it's an issue of you coming to grips with your divorce and what you want. I'm a 41yo divorced guy who divorced 4 years ago. I was happy to be non-exclusive for a bit and maintained that for a couple of years. But I wanted a deep committed relationship and found that with another divorcee. I would never have considered a relationship that didn't lead us to meeting each others' kids, because I couldn't care about her and not care about her daughter. It may be a while but please don't confuse your immediate reluctance to recommit with your actual desires.

OP here: Another man will never meet my kids until they are out of the house. That is 14 years away. I will never share living space or finances again. I know what my desires are for at least the next 14 years.

I agree that until you get to know your new partner pretty well, it's probably a mistake to introduce him to the rest of your family. So, maybe, 6 months or so? But realistically, how can you even have a casual relationship with a person if they can never meet your children? So that means he can never even come over to your house if you happen to have the kids that day? Because of the off chance he might actually have even a minimal interaction with your kids?

OP, it doesn't really sound like you are even looking for a casual relationship after divorce, in real life.

It sounds like you are working through a revenge fantasy against all men, where the man is available as your sex toy, does your bidding, but has no agency or rights as an individual human being.

I also think that since your kids are your family members, they have a right to have some information about who you are dating, just as you have the right to know who your kids are dating, certainly if the guy is anything but the most casual fling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can I just say one thing to you, OP?

You effing rock.

This is what putting your kids first in divorce looks like.

Signed,

Child of divorced parents who both remarried and made new families. It just gets really really old. It’s not the divorce that’s the problem, it’s the dynamics of the new families and how complicated they become.

It’s totally understandable to want sex, companionship, and love again. I don’t see why everyone feels to need to involve their children in all that. Focus on your kids. When your kids aren’t around, do whatever the heck you want!

Because families, even unconventional ones, are by definition, holistic entities.

If you bring an additional person into the family dynamic, you can't just pretend that person doesn't exist. Isolating the new person from the rest of your family--restricting access--has an impact on the entire family unit, which can be very negative. Let's put it this way: If you are dating someone, even casually, who you do not think is fit to meet your children--again assuming this has been going on at least a few months and you have gotten to know the person reasonably well--why would you continue to date that person at all?

After the initial getting to know you period, you have to make a decision whether you are going to continue the relationship or drop the person, as you are just wasting time if you don't. If the person isn't even good enough to meet your children, let's say after six months of dating, then that person can't possibly be good enough to keep dating you.

If your teenage child was dating someone for a few months but deliberately took steps to isolate that person from you, deliberately refused you any interaction with that person, wouldn't you think something was very very wrong?

I would.

Instead of thinking of other people simply as vehicles for satisfying our own perceived wants and needs, it's probably healthier all the way around to view them as equal human beings. If I was even casually dating a woman, and it lasted a few months, and there was an intention for it to go forward, even casually, and she didn't view me as "good enough" to even casually meet her children, then I would either be offended by that and dump her, or I would accept it but understand that something was wrong with her that couldn't be fixed, and bide my time until a better option came along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I just say one thing to you, OP?

You effing rock.

This is what putting your kids first in divorce looks like.

Signed,

Child of divorced parents who both remarried and made new families. It just gets really really old. It’s not the divorce that’s the problem, it’s the dynamics of the new families and how complicated they become.

It’s totally understandable to want sex, companionship, and love again. I don’t see why everyone feels to need to involve their children in all that. Focus on your kids. When your kids aren’t around, do whatever the heck you want!

Yeah, except she hasn't actually put her idea into action yet, and who knows if she'll stick to her guns once she meets some guy she is excited about and dates for a few months. Plenty of DCUM threads about women catching feelz after being some guy's FB.

OP here--there is no freaking way I am involving my kids. Not happening. I was over being in love before I met my spouse. I am not catching the love thing...that is so over. It obviously did not work with my spouse (the love thing), married anyway, which was stupid. It is 100% not happening that I would confuse my kids by having them meet some other guy. No way. I will have compartmentalized separate lives (mom me and not-with-kids me). That's it. I am 100% confident of this.

All this really proves is that you're not very good at relationships, and therefore, you should seriously question your own notions and expectations about what you think a possible future post-divorce relationship should look like, or is going to look like.

[Anonymous]

OP, have you ever been assessed for mental illness?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find it weird that much of this thread is about whether one can expect sexual exclusivity without offering the possibility of marriage. I am like OP, divorced, not interested in marriage or comingled finances or having companion meet kids, and not interested in relationship lasting for more than a few years as I have plans to move out of the country for career.

But, as someone who came of sexual age during the AIDS crisis, I have to ask - does no one practice safe sex anymore? Part of safe sex is getting tested with new partner (or sharing recent results), using condoms and sleeping with one partner at a time (i.e. monogamy). I don't understand why monogamous but not necessarily long term sex is so unthinkable. It used to be considered the sexually responsible thing to do.

Unless you or your partner are needle-drug users, male homosexuals, come from sub-Saharan Africa, or have some other specific reason to fear carrying the AIDS virus, then the "steps" you recite are more a function of political correctness than some sort of practical necessity.

I would be shocked if even 5% of heterosexual couples do the array of precautions you mention prior to initiating a penetrative sexual relationship with a new person.

And it's probably less than1%.

But hooray for political correctness amIrite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm an older divorced female. I have a FWB and he is TEN years younger and fantastic in bed. We always use condoms. Good luck!

And you know that he doesn't ever have sex with anyone else, but if he does, always practices safe sex--how, exactly?

Does it feed your ego to imagine, as an older divorce female, that you've got "exclusive" sexual rights to a younger, hot stud, and he basically is only there to service your needs at your whim?

Good for you. You go girl.