I'm a guy but I do not think the answer to this question is gender-specific. Anyone who makes it past 35, IMHO, without any successful, stable, long-term relationships, it's not just dumb luck. In other words, there is a reason, whether deliberate or not on their part.

That's re-stating this as a negative, but what it amounts so is: either they really just don't want to be paired off or they have issues; the majority are sad cases who do think they want to be paired off but have issues which lead them to behave as if they don't really want a relationship and they sabotage themselves.

This is equally true for men and women and is mostly because they have big trust issues, generally due to coming from dysfunctional families of origin, though not always.

I think this pattern is revealed in people who tend to chase unavailable people, and who have a string of <24 month relationships ('cause that's generally fish-or-cut-bait time). If someone makes it past 35 and they're still having a series of dating relationships more appropriate for 17-25 year olds, then they're stuck.

And before the "single and happy by choiice" crowds shows up pitchforks, I never said you couldn't be that way, but you also aren't really out seeking dates and relationships with people, are you? This question really revolves around people who say they want to be in an LTR (of which marriage is one form), but never have been past age 35.

I was married pretty young and stayed married for 16 years; I found myself dating again in my late 30s, and because I'd had the joyous (sarcasm) experience of being stepfather to a kid who wasn't mine (see poster above, who is exactly right about all the downside, none of the upside), I wound up dating a lot of never-marrieds (kid-free), in this target age range. There was a reason, every time. Very "picky" and not wanting to "settle" was the general excuse, but what that really is, is looking for a reason to reject someone so you don't have to face up to a fear of committing. Men and women do this.

The best, who are in short supply, were other 30-somethings, divorced (yay! You actually have a clue about what it means to be married!) and childless (no, I will not be raising someone else's kid again).

In DC, I would start to worry if he were 40+ assuming he had had long term relationships (i.e., he's capable of forming attachments and committing to someone). If he's 30-ish and never had a long term relationship (of, say, at least a year), I would start to worry.;

30's

35 is the age when its time to start asking questions.

These questions geared toward generalizations are kinda dumb if you ask me - every man has his own reasons/rationale as to why he isn't married yet whether 30 or 40 or 50 or 60.

Al Pacino has never been married because he enjoys telling new girlfriends to say hello to his little friend.
Bill Maher has never been married because his one true love is poltical satire.
Bruce Wayne has never been married because Gotham City is always in danger.
Each circumstance is different.


Remington Steele never tied the knot cause he was too busy solving mysteries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope it didn't burn!

It's hard to watch-I hoped for so much better for him.

No the coffee was lukewarm. I'm sorry for your friend's situation, I know that sort of thing can be very hard to watch. But seeing the situation written like that did make me laugh - I'm sorry!

No, it's ok-glad it wasn't hot My name for her makes me seceretly giggle, thank goodness this is an anon forum! Anyhow, he's trashed my friendship with him over her, so it makes it a lot less hard to watch than it would be otherwise.

14:53 here again.

I should add that I dated an older guy when I was in my early 20s.

He was pretty close to 40 and had never been married. He actually said he wanted to get married some day.

He cheated on me. The relationship didn't work out.

Over a decade later, I ran into him and he said he was married with a kid. But my suspicion is that he hasn't changed (he still cheats), because he was still very flirtatious with women.

My conclusion is that he was a bachelor for so long partly because he liked dating around. But he wanted the best of both worlds. As he got older, he wanted a sure thing at home and to have children. I think it just took a while for him to find a woman who would put up with his womanizing.

Anonymous wrote: I hope it didn't burn!

It's hard to watch-I hoped for so much better for him.

No the coffee was lukewarm. I'm sorry for your friend's situation, I know that sort of thing can be very hard to watch. But seeing the situation written like that did make me laugh - I'm sorry!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that some guys decide that they aren't the LTR/marriage/kids/white picket fence type...and they just plain choose not to marry. I've known some happy bachelors before - great varied dating life, freedom to hang with the guys whenever they want to w/o answering to anyone, responsible only to themselves. There are trade offs, I'm sure, but they seem fine with those trade offs.

I would consider it "amiss" if they seemed odd or unhappy about their life, needy but doing nothing about it...trade offs not really working for them.

Are these men that you know upfront with the women they date about their desire to not be married or do they pretend to be looking for marriage to bed girls and aren't?

Do they lie to get lucky? I honestly don't know the answer to that but I don't think so.

I've witnessed friends of mine dating men who are pretty clear about not wanting marriage or kids. The women, however, always assume the guy will change his mind after they date for a while.

I'm a woman, by the way, and I've long since given up on trying to convince women that usually if a guy suggests he isn't the marrying kind, you should believe him. And if marriage is something you want, move on.

So my guess is that men don't lie about this stuff. It is just women delude themselves into thinking the guy will change.

I hope it didn't burn!

It's hard to watch-I hoped for so much better for him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Any guy I know who is 40+, straight, and never married-has ISSUES.

I knew straight, good looking, good earning potential guys who had serious issues at the ripe age of 21, 28, 35, etc. What's the point of your post PP.

PP here-my point is-there are reasons, with these guys, that they are not married. Case in point-fella I know, 41, not married no kids, has had long term relationships but ends them all, good job but drinks-wants a baby but is now living with a divorced chick with kids who doesn't want to have another! So, he gets to pay for hers and do their bidding but won't get his own. What kind of idiot man gets involved with a penis-flytrap like that?

Ack..this post made me spit out my coffee.

Anonymous wrote:In your opinion, if a man is I married, but typical background (college, maybe masters or grad school, healthy dating background) no long trips or absences. At what point do you begin to thing it's that either he doesn't want to be married or is not marriage material?

35. My husband was 33 when we got married and that was pushing it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Any guy I know who is 40+, straight, and never married-has ISSUES.

I knew straight, good looking, good earning potential guys who had serious issues at the ripe age of 21, 28, 35, etc. What's the point of your post PP.

PP here-my point is-there are reasons, with these guys, that they are not married. Case in point-fella I know, 41, not married no kids, has had long term relationships but ends them all, good job but drinks-wants a baby but is now living with a divorced chick with kids who doesn't want to have another! So, he gets to pay for hers and do their bidding but won't get his own. What kind of idiot man gets involved with a penis-flytrap like that?

33 weeks should be fine, but realize unexpected things happen - I had friends with babies at 28 weeks, and one at her baby shower at 34 weeks. She traveled to her baby shower and ended up stuck in her parents town for 6 weeks until the baby was discharged. It's a low chance, but you do need to have a what-if plan.

As for the wedding, if 2 weeks old is based on your due date, my guess is that you may have the baby on their wedding day, so that's definitely out.

35...all that's left after that are sloppy seconds and baggage.