Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude you’re already too old now for any man to want to start a family with you.

There are many 55-60 year old moms of high schoolers in my son’s school.. It’s not that uncommon for career oriented women to have kids in late 40s now. I can imagine that not all of them used a sperm bank. Not that only men can afford late birth thanks to advancement of medicine. In fact, biologically an older mother is not as bad for the baby health as older father. Women just no longer can get pregnant with their own eggs, but they can carry to full term safely up until 60 yo.

Having a child at 41 or 42 is very different than at 48.

How is it different, did you have a child at 48? I know at least 4 women who had kids after age 45. All tell me it’s the best decision they’ve made. One is a highly paid MD (adopted a black girl with mild autism at 47), another adopted at 51 an Indian girl with some tribal rights over the child (after a 20 years childless marriage); a third got accidentally knocked up at 44 and retained 50% custody of her son in a bitter battle with a powerful dad; #4 had twins at 48 (divorced much older dad at 60 but they are on very good terms he continues residing in her house helping with kids while she dates her boyfriend in London). Again, all women are extremely grateful for their kids; they were well off when the kids “arrived” and all of them are thriving. Kids with developmental delays are now excelling at school; athletic sports and music. Moms are now in their 60s but look way younger and have husbands or boyfriends their age.

The thought of this particular OP adopting a non-white child is absolutely horrifying.

+1

So is the thought of her adopting (or having) a child with developmental delays or any other issues rendering the child imperfect to her. Note how she insists that "Kids with developmental dealys are now excelling at school, athletic sports and music." Can that happen? Of course. But is OP oblivious to the work and emotional toll involved for the entire family and support system as well as the child? Yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude you’re already too old now for any man to want to start a family with you.

There are many 55-60 year old moms of high schoolers in my son’s school.. It’s not that uncommon for career oriented women to have kids in late 40s now. I can imagine that not all of them used a sperm bank. Not that only men can afford late birth thanks to advancement of medicine. In fact, biologically an older mother is not as bad for the baby health as older father. Women just no longer can get pregnant with their own eggs, but they can carry to full term safely up until 60 yo.

Having a child at 41 or 42 is very different than at 48.

How is it different, did you have a child at 48? I know at least 4 women who had kids after age 45. All tell me it’s the best decision they’ve made. One is a highly paid MD (adopted a black girl with mild autism at 47), another adopted at 51 an Indian girl with some tribal rights over the child (after a 20 years childless marriage); a third got accidentally knocked up at 44 and retained 50% custody of her son in a bitter battle with a powerful dad; #4 had twins at 48 (divorced much older dad at 60 but they are on very good terms he continues residing in her house helping with kids while she dates her boyfriend in London). Again, all women are extremely grateful for their kids; they were well off when the kids “arrived” and all of them are thriving. Kids with developmental delays are now excelling at school; athletic sports and music. Moms are now in their 60s but look way younger and have husbands or boyfriends their age.

I'm figuring that's you again, OP. It fits your pattern of coming back to argue and keep adding anecdotes about privileged women to support how right you feel you are. Save the time you're spending typing out these posts and either get on with finding your sperm donor (because, you're not likely to get that baby AND a relationship though you will insist you'll have both). You are so deeply invested in the image of perfection that you've created around older motherhood that there's no swaying you here, so I'm not sure why you keep coming back to defend your position, other than to make yourself feel superior to everyone here. Go forth, climb Everest, raft the Nile, procreate, whatever.
.

Yes you haven't said anything of a substance beside personal attacks. I get it you are irritated by wealthier women who are easy with a "privilege" of having a nanny. My grandmother had a nanny in 1958, while she worked full time. She was not particular wealthy or privileged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why men are "allowed" to have kids with younger women in their 50-60s but it's not ok for a woman?

This is a very dumb idea for those older men AND the younger women even if it’s “allowed”.

President Tyler's (1841-1845) grandson is still alive.

99% of people commenting here are locked in stereotypes that women have hot flashes in late 40s that don't allow them to raise kids successfully. This is indeed very strange for the US in particular. There are many way poorer countries where women are basically "babysitters" for their own grandkids in late 40-50s and they do the lion's share of the household responsibilities. I was brought up by my grandmother while my mother worked (they divorced with my dad when I was only 1 y.o.). My grandmother took a role of a "SAHM" whereby my mother was at work 7am-9pm making money. Maybe this is why I don't see child rearing in late 40s so disastrous.
Also, many threads on this forum are related to lack of financial resources, career challenges related to child birth, men not happy when women stay at home or other way around, alimony, child support etc. When you already accumulated certain assets and achieved certain income level by your 40s, all these issues are easy to resolve. I do feel I would bring way more to the table to a man who wants a real family in my 40s vs what I can bring in my 20-30 y.o. self.

These are all theoretical questions, but I am indeed bothered how lopsided the society is in relation to older mothers. It's almost like everyone is telling you: time to enjoy your life, kayaking, hiking and dating. Kids will take all the enjoyment from you.

But I just don't feel that way, as having my first child was a very enjoyable experience and enriched my life immensely. All these kayaking groups and dating won't bring me a long term sustainable feeling of fulfillment and family stability.

My grandmother was telling that people live as long as others still need them on Earth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude you’re already too old now for any man to want to start a family with you.

There are many 55-60 year old moms of high schoolers in my son’s school.. It’s not that uncommon for career oriented women to have kids in late 40s now. I can imagine that not all of them used a sperm bank. Not that only men can afford late birth thanks to advancement of medicine. In fact, biologically an older mother is not as bad for the baby health as older father. Women just no longer can get pregnant with their own eggs, but they can carry to full term safely up until 60 yo.

Having a child at 41 or 42 is very different than at 48.

How is it different, did you have a child at 48? I know at least 4 women who had kids after age 45. All tell me it’s the best decision they’ve made. One is a highly paid MD (adopted a black girl with mild autism at 47), another adopted at 51 an Indian girl with some tribal rights over the child (after a 20 years childless marriage); a third got accidentally knocked up at 44 and retained 50% custody of her son in a bitter battle with a powerful dad; #4 had twins at 48 (divorced much older dad at 60 but they are on very good terms he continues residing in her house helping with kids while she dates her boyfriend in London). Again, all women are extremely grateful for their kids; they were well off when the kids “arrived” and all of them are thriving. Kids with developmental delays are now excelling at school; athletic sports and music. Moms are now in their 60s but look way younger and have husbands or boyfriends their age.

I'm figuring that's you again, OP. It fits your pattern of coming back to argue and keep adding anecdotes about privileged women to support how right you feel you are. Save the time you're spending typing out these posts and either get on with finding your sperm donor (because, you're not likely to get that baby AND a relationship though you will insist you'll have both). You are so deeply invested in the image of perfection that you've created around older motherhood that there's no swaying you here, so I'm not sure why you keep coming back to defend your position, other than to make yourself feel superior to everyone here. Go forth, climb Everest, raft the Nile, procreate, whatever.
.

Anonymous wrote:

Why men are "allowed" to have kids with younger women in their 50-60s but it's not ok for a woman?

This is a very dumb idea for those older men AND the younger women even if it’s “allowed”.

President Tyler's (1841-1845) grandson is still alive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re insane to want another baby.

I am 41 and have a toddler. Parenthood has made me an anxious, depressed mess. I would love the freedom and free time to travel with friends, go hiking & skiing, go out to dinner, etc. Instead, we are chained to our home all the time trying to deal with a needy, stubborn, and high energy toddler. I mourn for my old life.

Do all the stuff you listed, but skip the baby. That’s just irrational hormones talking. You’ll be a generation older than the parents in your new baby’s classes.

OP here: I am a very young (on average 10 years younger) mom comparing to other moms at my son's school. Not sure why being 10 years older than other moms should scare me off. Why men are "allowed" to have kids with younger women in their 50-60s but it's not ok for a woman? Do they actually have higher energy to be equal parent, or just go along the tide with younger partners who want kids?

I am still feeling broody, sexual and want to get pregnant. I feel the same in early 40s as in my late 30s and my desire to have a second child didn't disappear out of a sudden just because I got couple years older. With so much more free time in my hands now I feel that late 40s would be a way better timing to have a second child vs my "surprise" pregnancy in 20s which got me stuck in marriage for 18 long years.

Childbirth is not a catastrophe or end of life: I do believe having kids is fun, in all ages. I love doing stuff with toddlers, mid and high schoolers. All ages are interesting. You can travel with toddlers: of course it would be impossible to do no rope rock climbing but you can do many other fun things. I would take an au-pair or living-in nanny on my trips, we did it with our son when he was a toddler and it worked out just fine. He also was cranky locked at home but loved travel, new places and being entertained. Boys are attention-challenged and need change of scenery, sports and activities to keep them busy and happy.

I truly consider children as the only valuable thing you leave after yourself on earth: nobody would ever remember your career, or a nice house or how nice of a person you had been beside your kids and grandkids.

You have it all figured out and you dismiss every word anyone says to you that doesn’t feed your preexisting bias, so just ask the moderator to delete this thread. It’s pointless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Or it would be a 50+ man, too old to have same athletic abilities, energy etc.

I’m a 58M, squatting 350 and deadlifting 405, do a lot of hiking, biking, SUP, etc. Guess I better cut back on that since I don’t have the energy or ability, and just sit by the fire slurping my gruel. 🙄

Ooh OP needs to join crossfit!

Hahaha this is perfect. She can find her insufferable brethren.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Begging for sex the day after a csection? This can’t be real. How dumb could you be?

You have zero knowledge about female body. When V is not damaged during birth (C-section), it takes a month to recover from surgery. During breastfeeding V continues muscular spasms directed in returning to its normal size. The spasms also instigate sexual desire. If a woman is not exhausted with night wake ups and has a good help with the baby, sex drive is insane

I think this is a man. He’s writing it one-handed.

Yeah. The “begging for it” line sounds like male fantasy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude you’re already too old now for any man to want to start a family with you.

There are many 55-60 year old moms of high schoolers in my son’s school.. It’s not that uncommon for career oriented women to have kids in late 40s now. I can imagine that not all of them used a sperm bank. Not that only men can afford late birth thanks to advancement of medicine. In fact, biologically an older mother is not as bad for the baby health as older father. Women just no longer can get pregnant with their own eggs, but they can carry to full term safely up until 60 yo.

Having a child at 41 or 42 is very different than at 48.

How is it different, did you have a child at 48? I know at least 4 women who had kids after age 45. All tell me it’s the best decision they’ve made. One is a highly paid MD (adopted a black girl with mild autism at 47), another adopted at 51 an Indian girl with some tribal rights over the child (after a 20 years childless marriage); a third got accidentally knocked up at 44 and retained 50% custody of her son in a bitter battle with a powerful dad; #4 had twins at 48 (divorced much older dad at 60 but they are on very good terms he continues residing in her house helping with kids while she dates her boyfriend in London). Again, all women are extremely grateful for their kids; they were well off when the kids “arrived” and all of them are thriving. Kids with developmental delays are now excelling at school; athletic sports and music. Moms are now in their 60s but look way younger and have husbands or boyfriends their age.

The thought of this particular OP adopting a non-white child is absolutely horrifying.

Anonymous wrote:You want another child in your late 40s? How? Why? You can’t mountain climb and kayak with a baby. By the time the kid can do those things, you’re going to be the “old” person you fear.

What are your actual priorities?

Kayaking with a baby is actually possible and enjoyable. There are vests and 2-seats kayaks for that. Also, real hikers do it with babies - they just take non-slippery easy hikes.

It’s shocking how many people think having kids is like a major decease.

Signed OP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why men are "allowed" to have kids with younger women in their 50-60s but it's not ok for a woman?

This is a very dumb idea for those older men AND the younger women even if it’s “allowed”.

A “dumb” idea is to follow advise of those who think it’s too late for others to live their life.

A dumb idea is to follow the advice of people who can’t spell advice.

A dumb idea is not to recognize that age inexorably limits your options and requires you to make sensible choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Why men are "allowed" to have kids with younger women in their 50-60s but it's not ok for a woman?

This is a very dumb idea for those older men AND the younger women even if it’s “allowed”.

A “dumb” idea is to follow advise of those who think it’s too late for others to live their life.

Why men are "allowed" to have kids with younger women in their 50-60s but it's not ok for a woman?

This is a very dumb idea for those older men AND the younger women even if it’s “allowed”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude you’re already too old now for any man to want to start a family with you.

There are many 55-60 year old moms of high schoolers in my son’s school.. It’s not that uncommon for career oriented women to have kids in late 40s now. I can imagine that not all of them used a sperm bank. Not that only men can afford late birth thanks to advancement of medicine. In fact, biologically an older mother is not as bad for the baby health as older father. Women just no longer can get pregnant with their own eggs, but they can carry to full term safely up until 60 yo.

Having a child at 41 or 42 is very different than at 48.

How is it different, did you have a child at 48? I know at least 4 women who had kids after age 45. All tell me it’s the best decision they’ve made. One is a highly paid MD (adopted a black girl with mild autism at 47), another adopted at 51 an Indian girl with some tribal rights over the child (after a 20 years childless marriage); a third got accidentally knocked up at 44 and retained 50% custody of her son in a bitter battle with a powerful dad; #4 had twins at 48 (divorced much older dad at 60 but they are on very good terms he continues residing in her house helping with kids while she dates her boyfriend in London). Again, all women are extremely grateful for their kids; they were well off when the kids “arrived” and all of them are thriving. Kids with developmental delays are now excelling at school; athletic sports and music. Moms are now in their 60s but look way younger and have husbands or boyfriends their age.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dude you’re already too old now for any man to want to start a family with you.

There are many 55-60 year old moms of high schoolers in my son’s school.. It’s not that uncommon for career oriented women to have kids in late 40s now. I can imagine that not all of them used a sperm bank. Not that only men can afford late birth thanks to advancement of medicine. In fact, biologically an older mother is not as bad for the baby health as older father. Women just no longer can get pregnant with their own eggs, but they can carry to full term safely up until 60 yo.

Having a child at 41 or 42 is very different than at 48.

You're talking to a brick wall, PP. You're right, but the point is moot with OP.