Reply to Dating for 50+ men

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Dating for 50+ men"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. [b]She also did not need expensive dinners or trips. [/b]Instead, she wanted a clean, attentive, and adventurous lover.  [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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[/quote]

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?[/quote]

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).  
[/quote]

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 [i]not [/i]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.[/quote]

Your kids should get [b]premarital assets/build on your own before marriage. [/b]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.

[b][My personal assets are going to grow the fastest in my 50s, when I'm in my peak earning years and reaping the benefits of compound interest. That's exactly why I want to keep them separate. Why would I want to let some woman come and take 50% of the big gains in the endgame when those gains should go to my kids? Also, you said you have plenty of money, why are you so greedy for more?][/b]

You would get a partner sightly younger to spend your elderly years with, travel, and enjoy all benefits of very high joint income together.

[b][I don't need to marry her to do that.][/b]

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.

[b][Color me skeptical that when the lights go out, I'll be surrounded by my family with my loving wife holding my hand. Nobody dies like that anymore. I'll be in the hospice periodically checked by the nurse whether I'm married or not. And I'll be totally happy that my assets are going to my kids, as planned.

But that aside, how is being married going to get my kids $10m when my wife will get half of it? It's more like the other way around - I get married, kids get $5m, if I stay single, kids get $10m.][/b]

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.

[b][If you both make $400k and split expenses evenly then marriage doesn't provide much additional benefit. If by "lifestyle" you mean fancier vacations, you can do that without getting married.][/b]

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

[b][You're a woman. You're going to be single when you're elderly, whether you get married or not, because your DH will predecease you. All your arguments rest on the premise that he will die first. And you still haven't established that joint income provides significant benefit over two separate large incomes. Last but not least you are ignoring the significant financial risk of divorce, which is very likely in a second marriage.][/b]

[/quote][/quote]

What you wrote is incorrect financially. Your personal assets/pre-marital will grow at fastest rate, yes. You can put them in a trust to grow, let’s say at 7% annual rate.

But it doesn’t prevent you from joining incomes and acquiring new assets in second marriage. In fact, economy of scale from joint borrowing capacity, let’s say, for joint investment properties in your 40-50s is much higher vs a single borrower making $400k. It gives so much more benefits to create wealth jointly at that income level (pooling resources) vs just doing it individually.

And many kids are simply not deserving of showing be getting  everything parents earned. Parent has full right simply spend their assets or income during lifestyle. I get nothing when I die anyway. Whether my child gets $5mm or $10mm I’m dead. But I do want to enjoy the benefits of my life work diluting my lifetime

As a woman I won’t be interested in moving in with anyone without equal contributing and actual joint investment goals, jointly acquired assets providing further security to spouses in retirement etc.

And this is why elderly men die alone now: catastrophic stringency and scare to join goals with anyone else.

It’s often that the wives leaves husbands when kids grow up, after 40-50 years long marriages. Exact for same reasons ! Inability to agree on retirement, placing restrictions on her spending in retirement, freak control etc.

Good in to you, anyway. I’m dating younger for these reasons. Younger men still believe in joint future. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics