I'm a 52 to male and have dated as young as 35 and as old as 58. Age is just a number after awhile and chemistry is more important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male, 62. Age range 35-50

I’m 44 and wouldn’t date a 62 yo, no matter how rich, good looking and “young” you may be.

62 putting anything under 45 is just plain creepy. He's THAT guy everyone talks about on the dating sites...The Creeper.

The definition of "creepy" is not objective. "Creepy" is when an unattractive man dares to express sexual desire for women. If an attractive man does the same thing, it's not creepy. If this guy is actually dating women under 45, then obviously he is exceptionally attractive, not creepy.

A 62 year old putting down 30's is obviously troubled. One need not look further.

LMAO such a man is not "troubled", he is having the time of his life. The only people "obviously troubled" by it are all the bitter jealous old women who are weirdly obsessed with the age ranges other people "should" be dating.

I'm hardly troubled but think what you want. I just can't be troubled with women my age.

Why are you implying that being older, or much older, is an insult? I am much older than a 40 year old poster.

But I am not too stupid under the difference between saying something is true is far from the same as proving it is true.

However, you are.

It's an insult only if you are a person who likes to bore others with his own health stats. This kind of obsessive monitoring of health is more typical for hypochondriacs or elderly in poor health. It's not attractive. And it's definitely not a sign of vivacious, youthful approach to life.

You need to reread your post (the second one quoted above) and edit it so that it makes sense. The health stats were provided to show the difference between boasting with nothing to support the boast (e.g., I have a great body) and making a statement using facts

However, I think you would understand it better if I used a different example. The statement "I have great body" is an opinion. The fact that I am six feet tall is not because it can be measured and verified. Your approach to life is uninformed and you appear very poorly read. Again, these are opinions but every time you write a reply you make them appear more factual.

Anonymous wrote:

You should date women age 22-28. They don't want kids. And also, they are way hotter than 33-45.

I remember being that age. I literally don't know any girl who dated someone who was over 40 (not even over 30!). We wanted someone our age, hot musician kind of a type or anyone who shared our interests that had more to do with youth culture than anything else.

Like all women, you think your personal experience can be extrapolated into a universal truth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43 year old man, just dating no real range but for relationship 33-45. Even 33 is probably too young if she is single no kids because I don't want more and don't want to waste her time if she does

33-40 is putting you right in the "desperate baby rabies" zone you should avoid. Too much risk of "ooops I'm pregnant, let's get married and keep it".

You should date women age 22-28. They don't want kids. And also, they are way hotter than 33-45.

Women expire at 28 I guess

Yes. Indeed they do. That's when the crazy begins. Commitment crazy, baby crazy. A wise man avoids it!

I yet have to meet a woman who claimed to be in great shape and she wasn't. And that's because most women are extremely self critical. If the lady says she has a nice body, she probably does. We still don't know if she can compete with you as an athlete but that's objectively irrelevant. You should compete with other men instead.

Your posts are getting weirder and weirder. Again, you failed to understand any of the major points. Narcissists often claim to possess attributes that most other people find that they do not. Not only did this poster claim to have great body (as the partial result of plastic surgery) she also claimed to be wealthy, driven, etc. You are correct that, unfortunately, women are often unnecessarily critical of their appearance. However, this does mean that the narcissistic poster with the "great body" is as attractive as she is so desperately believes she is.

Why would I want to compete with her or other men about anything posted here? My goal was to call her on making narcissistic post, which I did. Sadly, everything you have written is response is mindless word drool. Except the point about using a 36" waist as an example. You were right that that is not realistic and a better example would have been "and is 5'5" tall, has brown eyes, etc." since these are facts as well and much more commonly found.

Anonymous wrote:

You should date women age 22-28. They don't want kids. And also, they are way hotter than 33-45.

I remember being that age. I literally don't know any girl who dated someone who was over 40 (not even over 30!). We wanted someone our age, hot musician kind of a type or anyone who shared our interests that had more to do with youth culture than anything else.

I had a smart, pretty friend in college who dated a guy who was at least 46. It was a long-term relationship and she moved in with him after graduation.

You should date women age 22-28. They don't want kids. And also, they are way hotter than 33-45.

I remember being that age. I literally don't know any girl who dated someone who was over 40 (not even over 30!). We wanted someone our age, hot musician kind of a type or anyone who shared our interests that had more to do with youth culture than anything else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:43 year old man, just dating no real range but for relationship 33-45. Even 33 is probably too young if she is single no kids because I don't want more and don't want to waste her time if she does

33-40 is putting you right in the "desperate baby rabies" zone you should avoid. Too much risk of "ooops I'm pregnant, let's get married and keep it".

You should date women age 22-28. They don't want kids. And also, they are way hotter than 33-45.

Women expire at 28 I guess

Anonymous wrote:43 year old man, just dating no real range but for relationship 33-45. Even 33 is probably too young if she is single no kids because I don't want more and don't want to waste her time if she does

33-40 is putting you right in the "desperate baby rabies" zone you should avoid. Too much risk of "ooops I'm pregnant, let's get married and keep it".

You should date women age 22-28. They don't want kids. And also, they are way hotter than 33-45.

Anonymous wrote:43 year old man, just dating no real range but for relationship 33-45. Even 33 is probably too young if she is single no kids because I don't want more and don't want to waste her time if she does

Exactly, and I feel most men and women have a similar view to yours. But In DCUM land we are led to believe women over 40 can only hope for interest from men age 55plus. That simply isn't true.

43 year old man, just dating no real range but for relationship 33-45. Even 33 is probably too young if she is single no kids because I don't want more and don't want to waste her time if she does

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male, 62. Age range 35-50

I’m 44 and wouldn’t date a 62 yo, no matter how rich, good looking and “young” you may be.

62 putting anything under 45 is just plain creepy. He's THAT guy everyone talks about on the dating sites...The Creeper.

The definition of "creepy" is not objective. "Creepy" is when an unattractive man dares to express sexual desire for women. If an attractive man does the same thing, it's not creepy. If this guy is actually dating women under 45, then obviously he is exceptionally attractive, not creepy.

A 62 year old putting down 30's is obviously troubled. One need not look further.

LMAO such a man is not "troubled", he is having the time of his life. The only people "obviously troubled" by it are all the bitter jealous old women who are weirdly obsessed with the age ranges other people "should" be dating.

55-year-old man. 47-56. Not only do older women look rougher, but women don’t become more agreeable as they age. Who cares if you know want. So I prefer younger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male, 62. Age range 35-50

I’m 44 and wouldn’t date a 62 yo, no matter how rich, good looking and “young” you may be.

62 putting anything under 45 is just plain creepy. He's THAT guy everyone talks about on the dating sites...The Creeper.

The definition of "creepy" is not objective. "Creepy" is when an unattractive man dares to express sexual desire for women. If an attractive man does the same thing, it's not creepy. If this guy is actually dating women under 45, then obviously he is exceptionally attractive, not creepy.

A 62 year old putting down 30's is obviously troubled. One need not look further.