People you are magnetically attracted to are often already taken or out of your league so most people settle for second best. Even ones who find their hunks or hotties, realize within few years that people whose egos have been inflated since they were babies because everyone oohed and aahhhed over them, aren’t going to see their partner as an equal or see household or parenting as their responsibility. They are used to people putting them on pedestal, it’s not easy to deal with when their partner wants them to clean toilet or change baby’s diaper or save money for 529 instead of buying designer bags and fine jewelry.

Anonymous wrote:Or is it better to be childless than partner up with someone you don't want?

By "settling" I don't mean "dating someone imperfect or bad on paper", I'm talking about getting with someone you're not that attracted to.

Your "settling" is my "not being delusional".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just go the sperm bank and do it yourself.

Not everyone wants or can be a single mother. This is a very privileged take.

So...you'd marry someone simply for money and to have kids with them? Good luck with that.

I'm a woman and I don't get it - I wouldn't have had children, which is an incredible commitment, with someone I didn't want to be with.

Who said anything about marrying for money? The goal for many women is to marry someone for love who also does their fair share of childrearing.

Right, and I married a man who does that, but I'm doubting these women who are willing to settle because they want a baby are also going to find a high-quality man who does his half of child rearing, but ok.

I’ve seen people who were tied together through traditionally arranged (not modern arranged where parents only facilitate meeting suitable potentials and wedding arrangements), and becoming attracted to each other and living long happy lives. I’ve also seen people madly in love with each other and growing out of love and attraction within years of marriage so there are no guarantees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Wait for finance bro who is 6'.5", blonde haired, blue eyed with a trust fund.

OP.
I'm not looking for an objectivle attractive man. I just want someone I have chemistry with even if the guy isn't conventionally hot

That's not a high bar, do not lower it.

Yeah, I don't understand these posts redefining settling when OP already explained herself. Looks like some people don't read.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just go the sperm bank and do it yourself.

Not everyone wants or can be a single mother. This is a very privileged take.

So...you'd marry someone simply for money and to have kids with them? Good luck with that.

I'm a woman and I don't get it - I wouldn't have had children, which is an incredible commitment, with someone I didn't want to be with.

Who said anything about marrying for money? The goal for many women is to marry someone for love who also does their fair share of childrearing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with a sperm donor is you're on the hook for raising the kid on one income.

It's better to get pregnant from a hot one night stand or from a short term relationship with a guy with some money so you can at least get child support.

Even if you have to "settle" for a few encounters or a short-term relationship, it is WAY better than permanently and continuously settling in a messy, resentful marriage.

It’s no wonder there are so many failed marriages/relationships here with this “find penis with a garnish-able wage and fertilize yourself by any means necessary” family planning mentality.

It wouldn't be a failed relationship from the perspective of the pregnant woman.

The child is all that matters and this is not responsible family planning.

A divorce and/or years of growing up in a loveless house is far worse "family planning". Sperm bank is pricey as hell. Short-term relationship with a guy and 18 years of child support is by far the best of the available options for a mid-thirties single woman who wants kids. Once she has the kid, she will have time to find a life partner instead of racing the clock.

Who said anything about loveless? Sexual attraction is NOT love.

NP. Sexual attraction might not be love but is necessary for a long term relationship for many people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Wait for finance bro who is 6'.5", blonde haired, blue eyed with a trust fund.

OP.
I'm not looking for an objectivle attractive man. I just want someone I have chemistry with even if the guy isn't conventionally hot

That's not a high bar, do not lower it.

Attraction is only a male thing , for females no one except a gay man will look like your play girl pin up models

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the man checks off a lot of boxes, you are just not attracted to him, go for it. Attraction typically fades within 10 years anyway.

totally agree here.

Yikes.

Do you do these men the favor of at least telling them you're not attracted to them? How desperate to you have to be to do this? Just adopt, use a sperm bank, or don't have kids. But why would you bring them into this world with someone you don't actually want to be with? There's more to life than just kids.

Anonymous wrote:If the man checks off a lot of boxes, you are just not attracted to him, go for it. Attraction typically fades within 10 years anyway.

Yeah, so you can come back and be one of those women on here who complain about their husband all the time? Do better, women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just go the sperm bank and do it yourself.

Not everyone wants or can be a single mother. This is a very privileged take.

So...you'd marry someone simply for money and to have kids with them? Good luck with that.

I'm a woman and I don't get it - I wouldn't have had children, which is an incredible commitment, with someone I didn't want to be with.

Anonymous wrote:A friend of mine had a baby at 40. I think they both settled for each other even though she is the one who thinks she settled. The important point is, they now have a baby and their lives has purpose and hopefully she’ll be overseeing their care in old age.
Interestingly she refused to have kids with someone she wasn’t sexually attracted to.

Obviously wanting to have sex with a man is the must to marry. Otherwise it becomes self rape I would go crazy

A friend of mine had a baby at 40. I think they both settled for each other even though she is the one who thinks she settled. The important point is, they now have a baby and their lives has purpose and hopefully she’ll be overseeing their care in old age.
Interestingly she refused to have kids with someone she wasn’t sexually attracted to.