The recent comments to an older post caught my eye. The post is from March of this year, and is titled Are Women Done With Men After Age 55? I did some investigation, and found that this is surprisingly one of the blog’s all time most popular pages:
Most of those pages aren’t surprising. Lara Logan continues to be a top search term used to reach this site, and in the runup to the 60 minutes piece on her that post was getting incredible traffic from search engines. Somehow my post ended up being one of the main search results on Google for that. The post When Judging the performance goes wrong was popular in its own right, and then Heartiste linked to it the other week sending almost 3000 hits my way. Should I divorce him is evidently a commonly searched term, and Google has my post of the same title on the first page of results.
But the over 55 page has me perplexed. Normally I can see where the traffic is coming from. I don’t see either large numbers of hits via a link or a search engine. Wherever these hits are coming from, it is clearly a popular page. One thing I did notice is that Google and Bing both have that page high up in the search results for “women over 55 remarriage”. Google has it as the first link, and Bing has it at the bottom of the first page.
Wherever the traffic is coming from, I guess it shouldn’t be a surprise. Women’s declining marriage/remarriage rates as they get older are a lightning rod, as you can see in the post Rationalization Hamster 500! Few topics generate more hamster spinning than this one.
While searching around I noticed one of the top search results for the topic is an article on babyboomercaretaker.com titled How Many Divorced Women Over Age 55 Remarry? I don’t want to keep you in suspense, so here is what women who click on the link learn:
As a woman over 55, if you feel that divorce is you only option, then go for it without any doubts or qualms. You should not feel insecure because there is life even after 55. You can get into the dating scene without feeling bad as many women of the same age are doing so…
…very few women over 55 remarry because they love their independence and do not want to make changes so late in life. They are content being in a relationship but not in a marriage.
Spin glorious hamster! Yes, the reason women are less likely to both divorce and remarry as they get older has nothing to do with their declining power in the sexual marketplace. They are really just loving the dating game! Forget that the AARP survey found that middle age and older divorced women who don’t remarry are very often terribly alone (emphasis mine):
Almost 9 in 10 men (87%) dated after their divorce, compared to 8 in 10 women (79%)… Among those who dated after the divorce, more than half of men (54%) but fewer women remarried (39%). (Page 39)
Many women, especially those who have not remarried (69%), do not touch or hug at all sexually. An even larger majority of women who have not remarried do not engage in sexual intercourse (77% saying not at all), in comparison with about half of men (49%) who have not remarried. (Page 6)
Check out some of the other articles linked from that page for amusement. I suggest Biblical Advice Second Marriages, which opens with:
Having a second marriage is not always wrong. This is especially so when you are sure that your first marriage was a mistake and was not meant to be. Maybe, you will find your true love and the right person meant for you the second time round…
As says the Bible, learn to find happiness in your second marriage, if not your first marriage.
Both articles have an English as a second language feel, so perhaps this is a site designed to game the search engines for hits. Either way, it is sadly very standard fare.
The US Census Hamster Gets Into the Act
I noticed another prominent link when searching on remarriage rates for women over 55. This one is a poster from Rose Kreider at the US Census, titled Remarriage in the United States. It has a chart on page 4 which shows that remarriages are making up a smaller percentage of yearly marriages over time:
Then she shares data on remarriage rates for people who divorced over 20 years ago:
As I’ve shown before (here, and update here) we know that remarriage rates have been falling in the US over time. This is clear in both charts from the poster, yet the author claims on page 7 that:
Most men and women marry within 5 years of divorce.
She makes this assertion even though her own data shows that this hasn’t been the case for women since the 1960s! She’s trotting out a myth that hasn’t been true for 40 years. While I (and evidently she) can’t find recent statistics on remarriage rates, we can see the footprint of the new reality on the system in the same SIPP data she is referencing. Per the 2009 table for non Hispanic whites, 39.4% of all white women in their 50s had ever divorced, and 18.3% of women in this demographic were currently divorced. Nearly 20% of all white women in the US in their 50s are experiencing Post Marital Spinsterhood. Given that these women came up during a time when remarriage was much easier, the future will likely be much worse for those women divorcing now. One other factor which would seem to make this worse is that remarriage opportunities for women decline greatly with age. This shows up in another chart from the same poster:
This is especially bad news for future Eat Pray Lovers who are delaying initial marriage today. Later marriage will likely mean they divorce later as well.
What part of the Bible celebrates getting remarried?
Here in flyover country, if a 40 YO woman with kids thinks she’s going to remarry after a divorce she sought, she’s out of her mind. She’s beyond delusional. Only the very highest status divorcees remarry. The rest are pump & dumps.
remarry as they get older has nothing to do with their declining power in the sexual marketplace.
This might be a stupid question, but are men over 50 that interested in a woman’s looks anymore? It seems to me that at that age, men would be primarily looking for a companion and thus would care more about a woman’s personality. Therefore, wouldn’t the decrease in the remarriage rate be due to the woman having a sucky personality?
@detinennui
Damn. Hate cats, so I guess it’ll have to be knitiing.
@ Chels
A lot of men are still pretty virile after 50. Some are opting to get work done or engage in hormone replacement. And of course, viagra.
This might be a stupid question, but are men over 50 that interested in a woman’s looks anymore? It seems to me that at that age, men would be primarily looking for a companion and thus would care more about a woman’s personality.
When my dad was 49 he married my stepmother, who was 27. That was over 30 years ago so men preferring youth is nothing new. And yes, they are still married.
I see Grizzled wolf beat me to the punch on the flat out lie some person told about the Bible saying make the second marriage better than the first. What Bible are they reading?
Over 50, does the woman carry about the man’s wealth and status anymore?
To a certain degree, yes, but I’d think that she wants a companion more than anything. If she has kids, she’s not all that worried about paying off the mortgage since she could just live with them.
Check if top male Hollywood actors marry women their age, or ugly women.
Sure, but the average man is not George Clooney or Harrison Ford; and I was asking about the average man.
Sure, but the average man is not George Clooney or Harrison Ford; and I was asking about the average man.
The “average man” (assuming a secular average man here) takes what he can get. Leaving aside Hollywood stars, there are guys in their late 40s who marry women in their late 20s — they are generally good looking, very established, and have alpha game, for the most part — which, as TFH says, enables them to fish in that pond. The average guy has no chance, so he takes what he can get. It isn’t that he is any more interested in companionship over looks at 50 than he was at 30.
The average guy has no chance, so he takes what he can get. It isn’t that he is any more interested in companionship over looks at 50 than he was at 30.
And I suspect that more and more, that if “what he can get” is less and less appealing to that average man, then he chooses nothing. Or he chooses relationships not involving marriage.
Men never stop caring about women’s looks, just as women are always interested in money and status. It’s just that they’re suffering from reduced circumstances (unless very rich and/or famous – the men, that is).
Older men don’t think that cougar age women are better looking than young women. They just (have to) accept that the younger ones are not achievable…
the ‘eye’ wants what the ‘eye’ wants, but is the wallet willing?
(sorry about mangling those phrases)
Chels,
As a guy at 50, HELL YES looks matter…but more importantly, the ravages of mental-pause also kick in with women in their 40-50’s. I would rather look for a 5 who is say 30yo with baggage but is sane mentally for perhaps 10-15 years more. As a guy of 50, who needs the drama of a psycho about my own age with hot flashes, mood swings, declining looks, weight gain, their own grown kid drama, etc…good God, I’d rather be alone. In the 70+ category, then yes, I’d agree, simple companionship would probably become a factor.
@Brendan
While there is definitely a good amount of exaggeration going on regarding middle age and older men’s ability to pull much younger women, the inescapable fact is that the SMP power position has clearly flipped by middle age. Men are both more likely to remarry later in life, and far more likely to be getting some if they don’t remarry.
wouldn’t the decrease in the remarriage rate be due to the woman having a sucky personality?
Nope. Older men as as into looks as younger men are. Hugh Hefner and his young, nubile harem, the whole “trophy wives” thing, and so on…at least as far as I know, older men don’t want to marry wizened and/or ugly women a whole lot more than younger men do. This isn’t to say that personality is entirely meaningless, of course, but looks are more important than you imply for older men, IMO.
To a certain degree, yes, but I’d think that she wants a companion more than anything. If she has kids, she’s not all that worried about paying off the mortgage since she could just live with them.
Is that a new female entitlement?
“I gave birth to you, therefore I’m entitled to live with you when I can’t find a 2nd (3rd? 4th?) husband!”
There’s so many female entitlements, its hard to keep track of them all…
the ‘eye’ wants what the ‘eye’ wants, but is the wallet willing?
This is funny, because I recall when my Dad was finally ready to remarry (my mother died at a young age) and people were trying to set him up with women close to his age. He was dead set against it. My own mother was 10 years his junior so I don’t know why anyone thought he was going to marry a woman in her 40’s when he was in his late 40’s.
Anyway an elderly woman friend of our family scolded him for wanting to date young women and suggested that a younger woman didn’t want a man practically 50. His responded that a young woman wouldn’t want a broke man pushing 50, but he wasn’t broke, LOL.
He wasn’t, and he got what he was looking for in a wife.
Also, a 40 year old guy can do quite well with a woman of 26 with an SMV of 4-5 who doesn’t feel she is ‘settling’ by marrying an older, established guy. Not all women under 30 are super pretty and many of the plainish ones with sense marry older men because the men value their youth and fertility and would rather marry a plainish wife and have six kids than marry a hot 40 year old with issues and have 0-1 kids.
In my subculture of Christians, that is a more typical May/December marriage pattern. Sucks for the 35+ single Christian ladies in the church though, many of whom were super pretty 26 year olds.
Is that a new female entitlement?
I think it’s perfectly reasonable for elderly parents (male or female) to live with their adult children when they shouldn’t live alone anymore. As much as Chels and I disagree on some issues, I don’t think what she said in this case smacks of female entitlement.
I happen to believe very strongly in family duty.
I guess that Chels has her answer then.
unfortunately the manosphere is not a go-to place for pretty lies…back to the Mills and Boon for the happy ending (or the EPL fantasiverse)
I guess that Chels has her answer then.
I guess I do then..It seems that men are horny at any age, even when they can’t get it up anymore and have to resort to Viagra. lol
yay Chels got it right.
I guess it’s a menopause thing, that women dry up instead of not stand up
Chels,
What a cheap shot;
“I guess I do then..It seems that men are horny at any age, even when they can’t get it up anymore and have to resort to Viagra. lol”
Women have to slather on the KY to get lubricated, botox, boob jobs, tummy tucks, face cream, hair dye, a cabinet full of “mommy’s helper” pills, then of course the booze etc…do you really want to discuss chemical warfare?
Please.
Oh, and who exactly benefits most from a turgid member?
Buck, it was seriously meant as a joke, I wasn’t trying to offend anyone, and someone made the same joke before me:
just visiting says:
September 23, 2011 at 1:43 pm
@ Chels
A lot of men are still pretty virile after 50. Some are opting to get work done or engage in hormone replacement. And of course, viagra.
Hey Buck!
you’re ruining the feminine mystique of cougars…shame on you LMAO
As regards ‘just visiting’; that’s the usual femmster projection at work, even the viagra bit works on women, or so I hear anecdotally…maybe we’re not completely different ‘down there’
Let’s add an interesting factor to marriage over 55…
Google the phrase “Marrying for Health Insurance”.
I’ll bet no considered that particular angle.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable for elderly parents (male or female) to live with their adult children when they shouldn’t live alone anymore.
That’s a non-sequitur.
If a woman divorces frivolously and then can’t find a another man to support her, it is absolutely wrong for her to expect her children (or the taxpayers) to make up for her bad choices.
Chels and Just 1 x
My comment wasn’t meant as a joke. 50 year old men are not collecting dust looking for someone their own age for legalized friendship. Not sure why you’re directing “femmster” cracks at me.
‘Femmster’ is just my mot du jour, I came across it this evening…didn’t really mean it a harsh way, it just cracks me up.
Feminist Hamster and Projection just seemed a natural combination.
A female talking about male crumblies having work done etc etc does reek of projection though, just sayin’
I mention it because I know men who have done it. They’ve managed to maintain their attractiveness and virility. The pay off is that they have a lot of female attention.
that’s all cool with me j.v.
the more fun crumblies of all denominations have, the better…I hope to get there myself (not all that far to go TBH)
This might be a stupid question, but are men over 50 that interested in a woman’s looks anymore? It seems to me that at that age, men would be primarily looking for a companion and thus would care more about a woman’s personality. Therefore, wouldn’t the decrease in the remarriage rate be due to the woman having a sucky personality?
A sucky personality and lack of looks go hand in hand. The aging woman is bitter about many things, but about the loss of her looks most of all.
My dad remarried twice after he divorced my mom, once in his late 40s and once in his early 50s. Both times he married women in their 20s — they were fertile, and he bred with them (God knows why, since he already had six kids, but he did). He had no interest in spent cougars, and he had the money, status, and looks to attract women in their 20s.
Well, yes, there’s that, as well.
Typical woman shaming language.
OT, but I think this comment from Roissy’s blog is interesting food for thought:
“If a woman must cry rape to recover her innocence, a large number will do it, even if the recovery is purely symbolic. You cannot have perfect license to plunder pussy at will, to exploit them and brag about your exploits, and then run crying to the law when the game is turned back on you. It’s all in the game. Women’s virtue will be protected, before or after the fact, by the victims or by their loved ones, through custom or through force of law, no matter what the official mythologies insist.
Fraudulent accusation with regard to anything is an injustice, straight up. But you are misunderstanding the source of this widespread phenomenon. A cackling feminist conspiracy is not holding the nation in thrall to an outrageous miscarriage of law. It is an attempt to redress an imbalance that everyone intuits, the official culture denies, and you make a lifestyle out of: women are fantastically vulnerable and easily exploited. (NOW gets the vapors.)
There’s a reason why “25% of all black murder suspects” are not “falsely accused of the crime by white accusers” while absurdities like date rape and sexual harassment have been enshrined in the U.S. Code. It’s because a black criminal’s trial and incarceration is not a rough substitute for justice in a cultural vacuum. A woman crying rape is.
You can’t have everything. You want to gambol with the free-range cows, you’re going to deal with bullshit. It’s all fun and games — carousel hoppin slags and game-playing stags — until real damage is done, which happens every time to the woman, whether you know it or not, whether she detects it or not. When we are damaged we seek justice by every means available. The feminist-inspired code has provided one of those means, and it’s rich to hear you ask for special protection from the stampede, even as you proudly make a life of laying back and culling the lame from the herd.”
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/09/22/the-anti-false-rape-accusation-campaign/#comment-275163
An older woman is more likely to have a sucky personality, and let’s not forget the age-adjusted number factor.
There are NO 50-year-old ’10s’. There are women who are a “ten” for neing 50… Big difference.
A 5 who is 15 years younger than me is better than a so-called “ten” my own age (40s). Youth brings its own enhancement to one’s number. When I was 25, half the women were above a 5, half below. Now 80% of them are hot since I’m in my 40s.
Most women my own age need a major renovation to their personalities before they are an acceptable substitute for singleness. I am willing to accept the physical decline, since I am no longer 25 either, but they will need to compensate by being even more agreeable than a woman in her late 20s, otherwise forget it.
Sex without a ring (or even an exclusive commitment) is readily available, because women over 40 put out more readily because they must. Why buy when you can rent so cheaply?
Now, I am not that exploitive of women, but many men are, and it is difficult to fault them.
And as far as needing female “companionship”? Hell, I can get as much of that as I want. Let’s just be friends, ladies! Haha! Shoe is on other foot, no?
I am soooooo glad I’m happily married!! Dating sounds beyond brutal.
“Doesn’t that sentence alone prove that the Church is failing in its basic role of teaching women what are the right choices, based on centuries of practice grounded in biological reality.”
Nope. It only proves that original sin is pretty strong. No amount of teaching will penetrate an entitled head. The Church does not have a mind ray to make everyone think the same, and nothing short of total isolation will ensure a congregation 100% willing to listen.
“A ‘religion’ that has many women age 35 single, after having had a double-digit number of sex partners, is not a religion. ”
That’s just ridiculous. A religion with no sinners… no such thing.
“A 5 who is 15 years younger than me is better than a so-called “ten” my own age (40s). Youth brings its own enhancement to one’s number. When I was 25, half the women were above a 5, half below. Now 80% of them are hot since I’m in my 40s.”
So, the number moves with perception? I thought the numbers were supposed to be objective.
Would I not be correct in suggesting that whereas (in the main) a man will not (unlike a woman) desert his spouse, that is not the same as suggesting that he would (if he were not already married to her) marry her for the first time? The reason, perhaps, that women over fifty-five are unlikely to marry, is that men over fifty-five are not interested in the older woman, whose looks and figure will have gone but whose attitude and behaviour will have remained unchanged (if not worsened) – men cannot put up with a lot of grief for an attractive (i.e. younger) woman. The only men interested in older women are those unable to find sex in their age group (younger women wisely playing hard to get) and/or those seeking financial support from older solvent women.
Something worth reiterating from that AARP study:
The majority of divorced people are in their 50s and 60s, having divorced in their 40s. That means 10-20 years in the dating market for those who failed to remarry. So what’s the risk? That’s right, the large majority are those who divorced in their 40s! Women, if you divorce at 40+ those figures above DO apply to you. In case you missed the part I’m referring to, here it is again:
If you divorce and don’t remarry, which the odds are against you–only 41% of women over 40 remarry–then there’s a 77% chance you’ll won’t get laid again!
Once again on the subject of Sexual Market Value:
So what we’re seeing here is women gambling and losing big in the dating game as they age post divorce. Women are more likely to date in their 40s than later on, but this shouldn’t really surprise anyone. As women age their attractiveness falls and there are just less men to go around. This isn’t rocket science. Plus in their 40s women generally have SOME SMV left in them. What I suspect is happening though is that women who are divorcing later in life are grossly overestimating their SMV and over the first 10 years post-divorce they find they cannot remarry, and then the attention nosedives leaving them alone and without someone to even hug them on occasion. That’s the reality this all adds up to.
“And as far as needing female “companionship”? Hell, I can get as much of that as I want. Let’s just be friends, ladies! Haha! Shoe is on other foot, no?”
@ Jack
Thanks for the light bulb moment. I laughed long and hard after reading this as it occurred to me how much this is true. I, too, am in my forties and out dating again. I meet all sorts of women and you just made me realize how much the roles have changed even though the reactions are mostly the same.
In my twenties I would meet some gal and, at times, get shuffled off the the friend zone. You know the story. Nice guy, whatever. Obviously, I didn’t know about game or the male/female dynamics at play. And I would get frustrated. They had entitlement even back then.
But now in my forties I am involved in all sorts of community and social activities. I meet all kinds of women and some of them make it pretty clear that they would like something more. But that entitlement is even stronger now. They have had 20 years of EPL marination. And when it finally sinks in that I have moved them off to the friend zone they don’t just get frustrated, they get angry.
“Most women my own age need a major renovation to their personalities before they are an acceptable substitute for singleness.”
This is so spot on and it speaks to the themes Dalrock has recently been blogging about. I can’t help but wonder if the lower remarriage rate for divorced women (compared to divorced men) is directly related to a couple trends. First, the population of available divorced women has been diluted by women who initiated divorces for frivolous reasons. I don’t think it takes much dilution to have a significant impact. Second, the population of divorced men has been diluted by men who have finally taken off the rose colored glasses. Again, it may not be many men but enough. It’s the combination of the two that creates all the disruption.
Nope. It only proves that original sin is pretty strong. No amount of teaching will penetrate an entitled head. The Church does not have a mind ray to make everyone think the same, and nothing short of total isolation will ensure a congregation 100% willing to listen.
….
That’s just ridiculous. A religion with no sinners… no such thing.
Your remarks are ridiculous. The Church cannot eliminate sin, but it can shame and discourage sinners. It used to do this quite effectively. It no longer does this.
Shame is good. Shame can stop entitled women. The Church is not shaming women, and as a result is worthless as an agency of social cohesion.
@ Höllenhund
Fixt.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable for elderly parents (male or female) to live with their adult children when they shouldn’t live alone anymore. As much as Chels and I disagree on some issues, I don’t think what she said in this case smacks of female entitlement.
This is an amazing comment in this day and age. This especially amazing coming from a woman immersed in feminism. We’re talking divorced people here remarrying. Some kid who’s mom divorced his/her dad effectively taking their father away from them lowering their lifestyle because she is not happy and then trying to get on the carousel. (still in the context of dating and remarrying) That same woman years later decides since no man wants her that she can just move in with her adult children. That is the cruelest and most selfish thing I have ever seen justified and rationalized on a comment section of a blog. To use a child it’s entire life and believe me that child is used as leverage against it’s father as status in a social context (motherhood0 and most importantly as a source of income. And then at the most stressful time in the childs life show up to burden the child with your up keep is just plain cruel and selfish.
This is point of view is coming from supposedly modern educated women. I would truely feel cursed to have a parent like that. better hope your children if you do manage to have any never come off the blue pill. One of my favorite movie scenes was in Monster’s Ball. (no not the Halle Berry sex scene no way even better) The lead male characters dad was comfortable living in his sons house. Said a few words of disrespect to his sons girl friend. He was disrepecting her and his son at the sme time. The next scene was the son with dad at a convalescent home. Dad gets to die alone.
We’re talking divorced people here remarrying. Some kid who’s mom divorced his/her dad effectively taking their father away from them lowering their lifestyle because she is not happy and then trying to get on the carousel. (still in the context of dating and remarrying)
I stand corrected, Greyghost for not staying on topic. I wasn’t thinking about divorcees, but elderly parents in general. I was particularly considering that even when a couple stays together for 50, 60 years or more, chances are that the wife will outlive the husband. So I concede your point.
I still say, even in this day and age, that adult children should care for their aging parents. And for the record, both my parents and my husband’s parents were separated by death, not divorce. I made the common mistake of imposing my personal anecdotal information onto a general discussion.
Apologies.
Terri,
You and GG are both right. In the traditional context, taking care of one’s parents after they devoted a lifetime to you was the right thing to do. The flipside was that those same parents dreaded becoming a “burden” on their children.
Notice how Chels is missing that dread. Entitlement => social/moral retardation.
Well Terri that is a good attitude to have on the subject. As a parent I never want to be in a position to need my kids to take care of me. Now if circumstances make it so I hope my striving and doing the thing neccesary to not have them provide for me will leave them in a position that they will ask for me to come stay with them. For a child to ask that of a parent when the parent is the most helpless is a far better “I love you daddy” than anything I could have received during a full lifetime of relationships. To have that offered unsolicitted from your child is truely a gift from god. A parent should try to make their child proud to be a care taker not an obligation. I always try to live my life in a way that will bring as much long term joy to anyone that tries to do me right.
Over 30, not a ten
Simple, Really
“Doesn’t that sentence alone prove that the Church is failing in its basic role of teaching women what are the right choices, based on centuries of practice grounded in biological reality.
A ‘religion’ that has many women age 35 single, after having had a double-digit number of sex partners, is not a religion.
No wonder Church is an awesome field for pickup artists to play, that too on Sunday Morning.”
Not all middle-aged, single, Christian women are all carousel riders who are reaping what they have sown. Now many of them *are* exactly that, no question (I dated more than one).
But there is a group of serious Christian women (virgins and very low partner counts) who are also affected by traditional blue-pill thinking – they don’t need to be “shamed”, though they should have been taught realistic expectations.
I know too many 5s waiting on 8s and 9s to come along and sweep them off their feet – which is unfortunate, because most would have made great mothers and loyal wives to average looking, average earning guys, but have been taught through society and media to set their standards way too high. Combine that with the alpha chasing sluts putting out for next to nothing, and they’ve been shut out of the MMP just like the blue-pill males.
grizzledwolf, I get invited to churches from time to time. I’ve heard sermons on the duties of men from time to time, sometimes on Father’s Day. Never, ever heard one on the duties of women. I’ve heard sermons on the evils of pr0n, always couched in terms of visual pr0n that men use, never in terms of emo-pr0n women consume. I’ve heard sermons that denounced promiscuity – but solely in terms of men going with prostitutes, men cheating on wives. Never in terms of women riding the carousel, or wives cheating on men, and never – never – have I heard a sermon denouncing divorce theft. Never. Maybe it happens all the time, and I’m wandering into the wrong church, could be. But from what my more churchgoing friends tell me, they don’t see or hear it either. Seems to me that divorce theft is, well, stealing – and I’m pretty sure stealing is bad, and wrong, and a sin.
isn’t a church supposed to discourage sin by all people, rather than just some?
Chels: “To a certain degree, yes, but I’d think that she wants a companion more than anything. If she has kids, she’s not all that worried about paying off the mortgage since she could just live with them.”
Arch: “Is that a new female entitlement?”
Apparently, yes.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2011/09/mother-sues-abandoned-children-for-parental-support/
I think Jack above reflects my own feelings when he says he’ll accept a woman being less attractive than when she was in her twenties as long as she is more agreeable than when she was in her twenties. Things I would put up with from girlfriends to have them around when they were young and at their peak of attractiveness I’m not willing to put up with from an older woman. So many women only had their looks to offer and once that’s gone there’s little left that I want from them. For the ones that do have something left to offer in the form of intelligence, a pleasant personality, shared interests etc., I’m still willing to engage in a relationship for the companionship. I’m finding that there aren’t that many middle aged women like that around, though. A lot of the middle aged women I meet unrealistically think they can have men chasing after them, putting up with their crap, and indulging their whims because of their sexual desirability when in reality that’s long gone.
Hmm…Mark, maybe there are less middle-aged women who are willing to put up with crap from shallow men who only value women as being “attractive” in their 20s…period! And maybe, just maybe, women of a “certain age” are less than willing to be “subservient,” or accept the fact that they can only be considered “attractive” if they are in their 20s.
The reason why there aren’t that many “middle aged women around” is because there are too many middle-aged jackasses who are threatened by them.
P.S. — Feel free to hate me, because I am a middle-aged woman, happily married to a middle-aged man.
sex is a bonding thing between two people. I am used to being chased for sex. I was big breasted as a youth and now. But that wasn’t love. I want love. Guys are here talking about how when I am 55 I can expect men to stop chasing me around for sex. Good!! When can I start looking forward to this? I don’t want it because it was never about me.
Alphalady: Men aren’t threatened by middle-aged women.
They just realise they are a last resort. In other words, owning a car with the miles put on it by someone else.
They have to pay relationship compensation for all her previous bad decisions.
Since middle-aged women are usually not hot, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
And, sad to say, most middle-aged women that men notice … are unable to keep a conversation going beyond “Men owe me! I am a goddess! If you question me I will get thugs to beat you up, or call you a pedophile!” (apparently men dating younger women, anger older women to no end) 🙂
That’s because those are precisely the kind of women that are left, when men take stock of their lives … or the ones that initiate divorce from a stable relationship.
Pingback: Beware The Greener Grass | notesfromaredpillgirl
Men over 50 are absolutely delusional. The majority of them are repugnant, bald, huge bellies and they have so much estrogen they look more like women than women. Nobody in their right mind wants a man over 50 including a woman who is 50. I wouldn’t dream of dating anybody my age and my husband is 15 years younger . yay me…it would I dump him if he doesn’t keep his hair… damn straight
Mary says it all. Why get married or have anything other to do with women, then pump and dump ??