Maybe examine your standards. And I do mean this in a constructive way, by way of perhaps helping to troubleshoot. The way you describe your experience above, you present as high-expectation which though not needy can be high-maintenance in a different way. Maybe that’s true and maybe not, I don’t know you. My point is, the presentation is important.

Before the first date with my wife, we chatted for 3-1/2 hrs on okcupid. That we could hold a conversation that long made me optimistic about dating her. She chose the location for our first date. It was a noisy hangout bar and I could barely hear her. I asked for the check before she finished her food, my hope crushed. Why would someone choose a place like that to get to know someone? I’m walking to the car, dreading the ride back to her place when she asks if I’d like some ice cream. We went to Cold Stone and talked for about 5 hours.

Later in our relationship, we needed our communication skills to work through various conflicts. Even though we have high consensus about parenting, we don’t always see eye to eye. My point there, if you expect to find the perfect mate, also expect to be disappointed. What makes a relationship is the willingness to work through challenges.

I really appreciate the part of the story where your wife invited you for ice cream. Sometimes I have difficulty being assertive because I’m afraid of rejection or I have a cultural expectation that if a man really liked me, he would chase.

But as your story illustrates, it can be very important for women to make that move!

Also what I’m getting from this and other threads is that it’s ok if a guy doesn’t seem to immediately want to marry you and have kids, and leave a little more time for the get to know you phase.

And then the get to know you phase that lasts the rest of your lives together.

Thanks so much for sharing your beautiful story.

I’ll share this other funny story. I had decided I was not going to be aggressive making the first move. Fun as they were, I was past looking for sexually-centered ‘relationships’, and I felt moving a little slower than usual would help me find the long term relationship I was looking for.

I show up for our fourth date. She’s curt and says come in. We get to the top of the stairs and she asks me to sit down and says “we need to talk”. Yes, THAT line. She says I think we should end this. I say ok, why? Well, I just don’t think you’re into me. Uh ok, why is that? Well you’ve only hugged me and haven’t even tried to kiss me. I immediately planted a passionate kiss on her lips. And explained I decided I was going to let her tell me when she was ready for more intimate touching. We went on the date and had a good time.

Anyway, I do want to say your initial presentation vs your interactions are very different. You come across as kind, thoughtful and caring, three foundational features of any mate that can go the distance. Just remember it’s about numbers, there is that magic number of dates you need to endure before you find him. Set a goal of more dates per week than you’re currently doing to accelerate your way to that magic number. I was at 2/week when I found my DW.

I was a year into my marriage when my wife claimed that she was the one who did the pushing of the relationship forward. I said, "That's not true, I did." She asked me what I did to do it, and I opened my mouth. And stopped. I couldn't think of a single thing. My wife just stood there with a knowing smile on her face.

And that's when I learned that my wife had had the reins of the relationship from the beginning.

You can do the same thing; suggest things, make it seem like the guy is making decisions when he is really deciding between things that you have already chosen. Invite him not on dates, but to "help" you on certain things. (My wife pretended to want to learn programming, so I went to her home to do so. Then after suffering through that for 15 minutes, she asked if I wanted dinner. She eventually turned it into a full date. She boiled the frog with that date.

Yes, I was really that clueless. At one point I asked my mom if what my future wife was doing was a hint. She said, "No, they're not." I said, "Oh." I was confused until my mom said, "Those are outright, blatant flirting."

Yeah, I was that clueless.

Now, not every man will be that clueless, but I think what my wife did would have worked on a lot of them. And for others, you can still be more subtle.

Also, from my personal experience, what you want is going to change over time. And even if someone checks your boxes today, they’re unlikely to be that same person in 10 years.

Being a parent changed me a lot (hopefully for the better) and 20s me, 30s me, 40s me are all pretty different guys in terms of priorities, willingness to listen to others, etc.

I echo other comments and say the priority is having a communication channel and the willingness to adapt.

And what you can afford is going to change over time.

They:

Chose their battles.

Didn't hold grudges regarding resolving disagreements with compromises and solutions.

Worked together in things as simple as cleaning up the dishes (~6 minutes usually).

Spent a great deal of time together.

Never forgot love meant showing respect, kindness, and tenderness towards each other.

---

In my opinion, a keeper is found by gradually intuiting answers to the extreme fundamental questions in life:

1. Is the vibe approaching effortless, real, natural, and safe? This alone isn't enough but it's a good sign.

2. Do they tick most of the ideal adjectives of a sense of humor, honest, reliable, respectable, fascinating, wise, and not a liability?

3. Who would you (and they) prefer to be stuck on a proverbial deserted island with them?

3. Would you'd trust them implicitly with decisions about your life and everything else if you were away or incapacitated?

4. Have you seen their reactions to not getting their way, under pressure, and with people not in positions of power?

5. Would you die and/or kill (if absolutely essential) for them, and vice-versa again?

6. Are both of you better together than apart overall?

That's my 2c. My bill is in the mail. :)

I know there are plenty of terrible men out there, but there are also plenty of great ones. 120 should be plenty to find a good match, so why was the match not there?

My wife is not perfect, and neither am I. We have our flaws, because everybody does. We're not the perfect mate the other would have designed if we had to design our perfect mate. We compromise, but we also bring things to the table that the other never expected. Don't cling to some idea of an ideal partner, but open yourself up to who they really are, and be willing to put in the work to make it work. And I think the most important attribute in a partner is that they too are willing to put in that work.

The reason I didn’t go into it more is because when I wrote this post, I was more curious about discovering strategies or hacks others had personally used to find their partner, especially after initially failing.

This is one of the most foreword-thinking, creating online communities solving some of the worlds biggest problems on a global scale. I felt that my post sounded desperate and I was prepared for trolls. But I felt it was worth it to expose myself in this deeply personal way in order to gather insights on problem-solving , specifically love hacks , from such brilliant minds.

I am not the only person with this problem and so I wanted to approach this community of highly creative problem solvers to see if they’d found any solutions I hadn’t thought of.

And then to determine myself if this solution could work for me.

Hearing about people’s personal experiences and from some of the data scientists who have weighed in, has been invaluable. And for that, I am so grateful.

In the beginning of the conversation, I felt that this was the tone: people were giving advice based on their own experiences or from their perspective as programmers and data scientists.

However, as the conversation went on, I felt it became more and more about people analyzing my personal psychology. And people became increasingly insistent I offer up the reasons I did not go on second dates with some people. I felt almost that I was on trial for poor discernment in who I was attracted to or not. Or even, for not being attracted to a particular person, as if that was somehow malevolent on my part.

I’m terms of my personal psychology, I already feel I have support in that area. I have licensed professionals, a therapist, two highly experienced spiritual teachers and very good friends and blunt family members who give me honest, though not always easy to hear feedback.

And I’m far from perfect. As you all saw, while I started answering people graciously, as I got more fatigued , I started to become less gracious, less clear, lost my temper and even spoke to people and about people in a way that was extremely arrogant, dismissive and rude. When I’m tired, I sometimes have a short fuse, and I’m sorry.

(To be clear, I have had overwhelming crushes on men of all shapes and sizes, lots of lovely hair and beautiful smooth heads. You are all handsome in your way.)

When I posted, I was not looking for a deep analysis of my personal psychology or character. And I believe I am not obligated to answer questions about that to a group of strangers.

It did feel a little uncomfortable when people started asking, then if felt, almost demanding, and at times accusing me for why I chose not to go on second dates with 90% of the men I met online.

Certainly, I’ve wondered many times if I’m too selective. And in fact, when I first started dating in my early thirties, I believe I was focused on the wrong things. Since then, I’ve learned that one can really grow to love someone even if there isn’t a spark in the first date - and it’s far better to focus on qualities rather than materialistic things like looks or job.

During my most recent round of dating, I kept a log of every single date I went on. I chose an accountability partner who is cutthroat honest who I told about every experience and why I didn’t want to go on a second date. If she felt the reason was bad, I gave the person another try.

The other reason I did not feel I wanted to share why I didn’t go on second dates, is because I don’t like to disparage others. (Yes, I know it happened in my comments) This post is about my experience, not the men I went out with, who I know will make some woman very happy one day.

Among the reasons I did not go on second dates include sexual harassment, insults, extreme religious views, being rude to a homeless person, overconsumption of alcohol, drug addiction and yes, occasionally bad breath, maybe not fair but it happens. Sometimes, I just wasn’t at all attracted to the person.

I hope this explains my reluctance to not justify the specific reasons I did not go on second dates and I once again thank everyone who weighed in - especially those of you who did volunteer some great, scaleable love hacks :)

Together, through our creative minds and the power of technology, I believe we can solve any problem in the world.

While 120 dates sounds like a lot, over 2 years that’s only an average of 5 dates per month. I think it’s a numbers game and you should be meeting like 5 people per week like it’s your second job (this means quick drink after work, and pay for yourself unless you want to see him again). I’m in NYC and this is what I did until I met my now husband; full disclosure I was 33 when we met though so I get that dating is very different at 41.

Regardless, since you desire biological children, you really need to adjust your expectations. You’re not in your 20s and your pool of options is getting smaller— it’s just reality. You listed reasons why you didn’t want a second date with some of these men but I just can’t imagine that Not one of them wasn’t just a nice normal average guy. You are the common denominator.

maybe consider that you’re expecting more than what you can buy in the dating market. You you have to pick from the options you have. It also sounds like you probably need a new accountability buddy; or maybe your perception is skewed and you’re portrayal of these dates is inaccurate. Ultimately, you are at the point that you need to settle for a nice average guy who also wants a family and would also be settling for you.

Lastly, check out this interview with Logan Ury (see link). She's a Google behavioral scientist turned dating coach and director of relationship science at the dating app Hinge. She mentions research shows that only 11% of people feel love at first sight or felt love at first sight with their partner (ie: “spark”). She gives solid advice backed by data.

https://www.npr.org/transcripts/965397828

I understand why you wanted the focus to be more generic. That's not how I or most other problem solvers I know approach solving problems. Certainly, one could write out a general theory of optimal mate selection that you would be able to apply to yourself without further back and forth. Crafting such a theory is several orders of magnitude more difficult than searching for a potential improvement in a given implementation.

With the disclaimer that I can't speak for others, I suggest that figuring out your rejection function isn't about deciding whether a given decision is good or bad and most certainly isn't an attempt to tell you who you should be attracted to.

There are a few intellectually interesting puzzles it presents: 1. Given some sense of what appeals to actfrench, where is she likely to find more such people? //You provided enough information to give a sense of this 2. Is there a discernible reason that the men she tends to accept tend to reject her? //I have a hypothesis but this is less clear 3. Is there some fundamental conflict between different aspects of what she likes? //Again, less clear 4. Are there reasons to filter someone out earlier in the process? //Again, maybe but unclear

As you note, you have no obligation to deal with any of this. But since you came back after a few days and decided to invest your energy in this, I'm giving you the perspective of one of those guilty of the aforementioned sin on why your psyche seems like a crucial part of solving the puzzle.

Ultimately dating is optimizing three things: 1. The utility of members of the candidate stream: P(Match) - Cost of discovery 2. The quality of rejection function which is a function of both information collected and discriminatory power 3. The probability that the candidate one most wants, wants you back

Anyway, yes, we can solve any problem in the world. One of us has to decide to build a new type of matching experience. I've toyed with doing so as I'm sure dozens of others here have. Sadly, the main constraint is time. Do we fix dating or healthcare or politics or education or just keep our little slice of industry functioning smoothly in exchange for the resources to live.

It will be solved. When and by whom remains unknown. In the meantime, cheers to special casing the problem and decrementing the target market size by one.

If I wanted to solicit stories like that, I’d tend to post on Reddit rather than HN and ask something like, “How did those of you who went on dozens or even a hundred dates with little success find a life partner?”

The good stuff is when it's effortless at first. For the long term, both parties have to be willing to put in the work to cooperate with another differently opinionated, fallible human being. Too many people ("middle-class" Americans 20-35) behave in an entitled manner without putting in the effort or the reciprocity. They're indeed special, like everyone else.

Edit: Also, you should know how someone behaves in extreme situations because that reveals their character. "Do you trust them with your life and everything else?" is the question that must be resolved eventually in the affirmative to consider them a dependable and trustworthy keeper.

---

BTW: If you want to be immensely unpopular with most people, get good ones tagging along with other good ones of their preferred general demographics. It's absolutely revolting when people consider others besides themselves without ulterior motive but to be cool. :peace:

a. 13" x 9". A tape measure and body shaming ensued.

b. Minimum $200m net balance sheet.

c. Minimum 6'7" height.

Re-examining standards and re-evaluating whether every box needs to be ticked is a hugely important next step. I thought at one point that I'd met someone who "checks" all my boxes only to learn that we had some fundamental incompatibilities that kept the relationship from being fruitful for the both of us (in a metaphorical sense).

And honestly, if I encountered a partner who's methodically researched dating with the goal of having kids ASAP, I'd be terrified of getting baby-trapped. The desperation is a colossal turn-off.

Also, since crowdsourcing is up her alley, crowdsourcing relationship errors might not be a bad idea when it comes to OP figuring out where she's going wrong.

---

Then again, I run Relationship Advice on Reddit. Mild bias on my part.

I certainly don’t lead the first date with wanting to have kids unless people ask. But I’ve heard from several relationship experts to be sure values are aligned in the first couple dates. Fortunately, people usually specify this in dating apps so you can filter for people who don’t want kids.

Funnily enough, one of the biggest turn-offs I’ve experienced from men is them asking me very specific questions about my fertility and the quality of my eggs even before we went on a first date or even via text BEFORE we met such as, and I kid you not, “how long ago did you freeze your eggs.” “Oh you want kids, are you planning to adopt ? Because , your age…” “ would you be willing to have kids before we got married, because your age…” again, via text before we even met.

I don’t think there’s any shame in being clear I want a family soon and hopefully this will attract a man who shared the same goal.

   1. Estimate the odds of successfully procreating upfront; Downside: Can seem boorish and unromantic and ruin the chance of a potentially successful relationship.

   2. Keep getting to know each other and discuss once we're more comfortable with each other. If the answer is unfavorable:
  a. Be honest about the reason for ending the relationship; Downside: Cruel to one's partner and heartbreaking
  b. Fabricate an excuse for ending things; Downside: Dishonest and unfair to partner; guilt and heartbreak
  c. Stay anyway; Downside: Reduces likelihood of having children

Of course, you're doing that now. This has gotten so much attention that it I'd give you one-third odds of being married in 18 months to either someone who saw this thread or someone someone who sees this thread introduces you to.

This is the dilemma with so many things. In trying to figure out a generic way of solving the problem, you take an approach that works fabulously for you but is difficult to scale. A bit like the education problem...

What is not ok is inferring that they couldn’t have children because of their age or asking very pointed questions about their reproductive health on a first date, especially if they don’t want to volunteer that information to someone they barely know. Don’t you think it would be odd if a woman who you were ok a first date asked you about your sperm count and pressured you to reply if you weren’t able to volunteer that info immediately ?

The other thing is that I am clear about my age and desire to have children in my dating profile, so it’s upsetting to have someone second guess me on a first date…

If a woman is kind and compassionate and honest and not sure about her ability to have kids, when you’ve expressed a strong desire to have them, she’ll take the high road and tell you or leave the relationship.

If you are ready to get more serious with someone and have trust and intimacy built up, it is totally ok to have that conversation.

That's a really kind and encouraging thought. I appreciate that.

It's kind of amusing to me that people are starting to think the way I presented myself in this post is the way I should present myself on a first date. I would also worry about scaring someone away! That said, I've already met a couple people through the post, so maybe being up front and explicit about what I want is a good thing!

In trying to figure out a generic way of solving the problem, you take an approach that works fabulously for you but is difficult to scale." ->> so true

" A bit like the education problem..." nice one:) you pay attention to detail!

An assortment of thoughts: I hope you read How to Win Friends and Influence People. And it's not because you need it to know how to communicate. While I'm sure you'd learn a few things about talking to others, I suspect you'll learn something about the way various styles of communication make you feel. You can see it in the variance of of your responses in this thread. I'm not convinced that this is a core issue but seeing the way a few different comments have elicited affection combined with your comment about wanting to feel seen makes me think it could explain why the men who attract you so often tend to disappear.

It might be interesting to ask your dates at what point during the thread they decided they wanted to get to know you. I can imagine a more analytical person finding you appealing enough from the intro. But if I had to guess, this medium works for two reasons. The non-scalable one is that humans care more as they know someone better. The thread is long and you get vastly more mental attention than through other means of introduction. The scalable ones are attributes that come through in your comments but not in your post: You radiate earnestness and ebullience at a level that's rare even in humans a decade younger; you're indefatigably engaged; you have the patience to try and reason with almost anyone yet occasionally lose your temper which is further evidence of complexity; in short you appear human.

In terms of action items : I will read the book How To Win Friends, and I’m also going to focus on developing relationships with male friends and dating more. Taking more time to get to know people and they me.

Speaking of being indefatigable, I am quite driven when I want something and it’s hard for me to stop, but especially with some of the more recent comments, I think I’ve reached the fatigued point.

With regards to dates : I went out with an incredible guy today that I met through this post, 10x liked him more than any of the last 90 dates.

He said what drew him is how brave I sounded.

We will see what happens but I’ll going to focus on friendship and being bold. I asked him to hang out again :)

Thanks for your kind words and I look forward to reading the book :)

For what it’s worth, my wife’s view is that women who want kids should be clear about that up front to filter out guys who aren’t like minded. They are out there. Men want kids as much as women, statistically. Maybe find a south Asian guy whose mom has put him on a deadline, lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_...

On December 10, 1927, the then-21-year-old Stewart married the 81-year-old Martin, primarily to get help raising her son and because his $50 per month Confederate pension check guaranteed her a degree of financial security. She gave birth to a second son, Willie Martin, 10 months after her wedding to William Jasper Martin, who was 82 at the time of the child's birth.

The child trap can work both ways - a woman wanting a child but not a spouse may attempt to divorce and leave with the child, which could be a turn-off for men who actually want children but want the woman to value them - not only as fathers.

This ruins a lot of my friends dating scenarios. I think you maybe should rethink that.

In my humble opinion, the laws of supply and demand are stacked against you. Most single men in there 40's expect that there partners are wanting to have kids and feel pressured by hearing it on a date.

You also could miss high quality options who say they're " not ready" to have kids, when they mean that they haven't met the right person and/or haven't arrived at their desired financial level. If men think they can't provide, they are going to say "no to kids". I had a friend that was 38 and said he didn't want kids, then he was given a $70k increase ( from $110,000 to $180,000) 3 months later and then he switched to ready to have kid and was married within 6 months. Men need to feel they have a financial security or they will pass.

I think the right answer to my friend circle would be " I do really want to have kids someday with the right person, but not in the next 2 years." Then you can re-evaluate a month later if things are going good and say " we have a great connection, I really would be open to having kids much sooner. Thoughts?"

I know a few guys this worked on. They just were hearing kids immediately as a red flag, when really they were more inline then what either party truly understood at the time.

Think on it. Hope this helps.

Men need to feel they have a financial security or they will pass

i wonder if men who need a high income before they fell that security are potentially covering up other insecurities or are just very materialistic. i'd be wary.

"not in the next 2 years." Then you can re-evaluate a month later

i don't like that much. i'd prefer people clearly state their expectations. make clear what conditions you expect before you can have kids. don't have hidden criteria that make you change your mind without the other being aware.

(btw, if i may say so, if we are all going to wait until we have such a high income before having kids then the birthrate is going to drop even more than it already is. but that's just another sign that raising kids in the US is just way to expensive)

That part made me uncomfy too. I'm quite young and I've never dated so take this with a grain of salt, but maybe also clarify that you're open to the fact that you may change your mind? I don't know.

Also she smoked. It was clearly a relationship where my emotions conflicted with any sense of reason.

> The percentage of IVF cycle starts that resulted in live births was 41.5% in women younger than 35 years, 31.9% in women aged 35–37 years, 22.1% in women aged 38–40 years, 12.4% in women aged 41–42 years, 5% in women aged 43–44 years, and 1 % for women older than 44 years. In contrast, in patients who used eggs obtained from healthy, young donors, 51% of fresh transfers resulted in a live birth, regardless of the age of the recipient.

https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-op...

Nature is different as fertility patterns between man and women.

If women does not have their ducks in line at 32.

This thread happens.

I am not saying this is fair or nice.

However men usually dies 5 years earlier in average.

Things are different saying its not does not help.

Edge cases are not normal.

I’m sorry but a woman would not post this BS

But if you’re up on fertility issues, it’s a legitimate concern. As people age, the rate of fertility success inevitably goes down, and the risks (e.g. Down syndrome) go up pretty dramatically.

Having frozen eggs greatly reduces those risks, and for an older man that wants kids, a potential wife with frozen eggs could mean a lot.

Gave birth to our “happy accident” a few months after my 40th, chasing around a robustly normal, deviously clever near-two-year-old now.

Please don't take what I'm about to say as an attack on you; I'm going to describe the human condition that ALL of us suffer from, using your situation as an example.

What you've just described is the inverse of the kind of vibe you're giving off to potential partners, specifically: an ulterior motive. This is absolutely a turn-off because it gives the impression that the person is just secondary to the goal (a kind of "nice to have"). In your case, an incubator for their child, and in their case some sperm and 18 years of financial liability should it not work out and worst case you get full custody. When things fall apart, the war will be bitter and the one using the other will ruin both the child's and the ex-partner's life as they scorch the earth to fulfill their need.

So there is already conflict and ulterior motives on both sides, and you haven't even spoken yet! Not the best place to start from...

Nobody wants to be played for a fool; that's why you need a long dating process to suss out whether the other person is honorable and wants you for you, or is just using you to satisfy some need.

Ideally, you'd both be without ulterior motive when you start dating, but neither party has that option anymore because the clock is ticking. So you really do need to acknowledge the elephant in the room, and work together to come up with a solution/compromise that both can be satisfied with. These include:

- Not having children

- Freezing eggs

- Adopting

- Having children before dating (sperm donors)

Whichever route you're leaning towards, you're going to need to have a frank talk with any man you talk to about dating, and you'll need to have this conversation early, because BOTH of you are running low on time (you moreso than him), which breeds desperation. And desperation is a HUGE turn off unless you can both have a real, mature conversation about the reality you face, and decide whether you can work together or not. This is no easy task, which is why the dating process usually takes years. And you definitely DO NOT want to bring children into the picture until those years have been spent together. Anyone who tries to take short cuts in this part is being irresponsible, and that's a huge turn off. That's why you're disgusted by the behavior you mentioned.

TBH your most likely chance for success would be to agree to adopt, because then you gain the luxury of time again and could date in peace and really get to know each other without this nagging feeling that you're merely mr/ms Right Now. But any of those solutions still have a decent chance of success, so it's on you to decide what will be your plan A and plan B, and make sure anyone you date is on board with that.

The strongest signal you can give that you're a fit parent and partner is to demonstrate that you've thought this all through very carefully for the child's sake, and expect any potential partner to as well.

Good luck and godspeed!

I believe that gently asking someone if they're open to having kids on the third date or so is very different than aggressively asking a woman very specific questions and making generalizations about her reproductive health before you've even had a first date or on that first date, especially when the question was uninvited.

It is sad to me that so many people feel that I should hide my desire to have children because "it's a turn-off."

I feel that it's important to be honest and truthful with people.

Getting an agreement about having kids early on is absolutely a good thing. And those examples of aggressive questioning are absolutely a bad thing, morally speaking.

But I'm not talking about morality, rather, psychology. The landscape you find yourself in is not ideal to forming trusting relationships, which means that one must navigate much more carefully than someone in their twenties would. Not because you have anything shameful or things to hide (quite the opposite), but rather because there are many desperate people in similar situations who improperly court the idea that a little deception or trickery now can be made up for later. And in doing so they poison the well.

I also agree with you that being honest and up front about what your goals are is absolutely essential. After all, you're building a relationship, and its strength is directly proportional to the foundation of trust.

I guess all I can say in the end is: You're not doing anything wrong, but also that not everyone is the same. There are people out there who share your ideals and goals, and it's a matter of luck to meet them because all of the dating apps and services out there suck (I dealt with them before marrying someone I met in a completely different context and completely by chance and with no initial intent for a relationship, in my early 40s - go figure). I still don't envy your position, but I do wish you good fortune. Keep the faith.

The point of my comment is to raise awareness of the overarching problem of ulterior motives no matter how benign in the end. At this late stage in the dating scene, almost EVERYONE will have it. And there is a certain ... "selfishness" isn't the right word (English is too morally blunt to describe this), but definitely need and time pressure on the part of people when it comes to dating for the ultimate goal of having a lasting relationship AND starting a family this late in the game. It's unavoidable that your motives get mixed and jumbled, so it's especially important to communicate this and not accidentally come off as "progeny first, you second".

I don't envy her or anyone in this position, because it's hard enough to communicate these when you ARE on the level and honorable, let alone trying to discern that from the selfish, abusive, whatnot people out there.

> I don't envy her or anyone in this position

Thank you for the follow up, but I'm afraid your tone is somewhat too assertive.

Best of luck to the above poster and OP

What alternative is there for a person who wants kids that is running out of time to have kids?

But at some point, you need to accept some responsibility for why you don't have kids. A woman can literally go and attempt a pregnancy on any given day of the week.

Note that having kids is not the same as finding a man who wants to start a family with a 41-year old woman. That's just the reality of it.

How am I not accepting responsibility for not having kids?

I guess in some circles it's only acceptable to think about dating as a means to have sex? Very odd.

If you don’t internalise this simple reality you will not understand why those men behave towards you the way they do.

> Please encouragement only, no discouragement. I’m discouraged enough already.

IMHO, that's exactly the problem. Bear with me for a sec.

Unless you find someone who has the exact same objective and wants to have kids asap (i.e., a more transactional relationship), this will always be a major turn off. Your partner will feel pressured to make a decision quickly, and sooner or later will think the main thing you want is their sperm to have a baby. That's a recipe for folks to back off. Even if you believe you're not putting pressure, I bet they can smell it a mile away. It has a direct impact on your mindset, your behavior, and self-confidence, even if you believe you're effective in masking it.

It may sound counter intuitive, but once you stop trying "to find someone to marry and have kids", you may actually find someone.

The first step is to start accepting yourself and your life as it is -- and being proud of being single and having no kids. It is what it is. Cut the bullshit of dating coaches, hundred dates, dozen of books, and all the mental energy you're wasting obsessing about it. Give up the serial dating, and immerse yourself in work, or a cause you care about, sports, gym, hobbies, church, or whatever suits your fancy. Sure, make new friends and go on dates, but not because you want to "find love and build a family", but because you want to have fun and enjoy having sex every now and then.

Once you do it - truly do it - you'll be seen as more attractive, more powerful, successful, confident, remarkable, independent. You won't need anyone on your side to be the best version of yourself. And there's nothing more f*ing attractive than that.

Pragmatically speaking, you've already frozen your eggs, so you have a plan B for later. For now, internalize that you are enough. Once you accept it, everything else will follow.

I think the everything will follow piece is a spiritual bypass that isn’t reflected in reality.

There are so many confident, beautiful , career-driven women who are in the same predicament as me.

I think that women are learning to take charge in every aspect of their lives. Why not relationships.

When I’m building my startup, no one says, sit back, be confident and the startup will grow itself.

Why shouldn’t it be that I can have a strategic goal in my life to have kids and a family and work towards achieving that in an active, not passive way ?

Some time back, I was set up for a date with an absolutely amazing woman. She was attractive, fit, wealthy, worked as a CTO in a very successful and growing startup. I think she was on one of those Forbes lists. Also, out of my league, but she didn't seem to think so.

Anyway, we had a date, it went fine, and then she told me about her bucket list, all the cool ideas she'd had. Well, she'd already crossed off everything except "find a guy to have kids with". It was kind of a clever little way to drop what she wanted into conversation, and I thought she carried everything off with confidence and aplomb. She also let me know that she'd go out with me again.

I didn't ask for a second date. I still think about why from time to time. Nothing about her was wrong for my tastes -- all the success, intelligence, confidence, etc is attractive to me -- so why not carry on a bit further? The conclusion I came to was: I just felt like I'd be wasting her time. She told me exactly what she wanted, but I didn't have the same certainty. I didn't feel like I was a good inclusion to the plans of someone so focused and certain of her goals. She was also short on time to go ahead and get a family set up; what if I dated her for two, or four, or six months then decided that we weren't a perfect match? I'd feel guilty as hell, because I burned some extremely valuable time. So: better to bow out.

Anyway, that's all a long anecdote with no specific point or lesson, and unfortunately I don't know how it could have gone better for her. Your description of yourself just reminded me of that story, so I thought it might be of interest to hear a retrospective from "one of those guys".

I'm male, married, with two beautiful, clever children and a beautiful, clever wife. The wife has a rich list of ambitions and expectations from life, more and more as time goes on. Model 21st century woman really. She's killing it at work, learning new sports, lifting weights, networking, recently joined a government expert panel, really nailing it.

The one thing she doesn't have time for is me. I'm just there, right? But between work, always keeping an eye for new, better jobs, taking the kids to ever more elaborate activities, I'm the washing machine of the relationship: it's essential that it's there, if it makes a funny noise you better fix it, but when it's just fine you don't think about it for 2 mins. She also doesn't seem to even acknowledge that there is a tradeoff made.

Tbh, and my wife isn't on HN, if not for the kids, I'd be well gone by now. For the kids, and the kids alone, I feel at least for now it's worth sticking to it.

So, long intro done, I'd now be very, very wary of people who have long and detailed expectations of life. It's not like I'm unambitious, underachieving or slouching on the sofa. But my expectations of life is more like, strive to be happy and do interesting, meaningful things. A career for the sake of career, for example, isn't on it.

The thing is, we are bombarded left right and centre (and women perhaps more so) with propaganda that this is the only way. If you're not aiming for a top career, doing 2 sports, yoga, learning Mandarin, focusing on yourself, oh and don't forget mindfulness, then you're cave-dwelling troglodyte. Thing is, that might just not leave space for an actual relationship, or at least sound that way.

I've heard this attitude labelled in certain circles as "men being afraid/threatened by modern women", but it's not that. It's about finding someone who want to genuinely make space for another person in their life, give something and get something. That is at odds with the widely acclaimed approach that life is there to take take take from.

I am divorced with two beautiful teenage daughters from my current -happy- marriage and a 20 year old son from my first. My son not only understands why the divorce happened (dysfunctional relationship that made me feel miserable), but has admitted that seeing me happy and fulfilled has done wonders for his psychological development. He was 6 years old when I divorced my first wife.

One thing to consider is what you are teaching your kids by staying. Kids have a habit of picking up on these things at an early age and can internalize the unhealthy relationship you have as ‘normal’.

You’re correct though, it’s about priorities. I’m a corporate lawyer but I always put my husband first because at the end of the line I surely won’t be thinking, “I wish I worked more.” What’s it all for if you don’t have someone to share with.

Also, maybe your wife needs the reality check?

As for later, who knows. Somewhere between the age of 0 and 30, you don't need your parents to hold your hand when you have a nightmare, when that time comes I'll think again.

The mind finds excuses to propagate your situation because it is afraid of change, and I can see that very clear in your words about “logistics”. Logistics is not a good reason at all to live your life as a washing machine.

The thing is, i just love and prioritise my kids. It's also not like I'm not living a good life, just a good relationship isn't part of it.

Alot of men who wanted families don't want career women, or already have their own family.My brother is 35 with three kids oldest is 10. My other brother is 52 year old banker who married a 34 year old woman, and they have several kids now.

I think your desire for someone of equal education or financial background will make it nearly impossible.

Have you read the story of Chris McKinlay hacking Okcupid? https://www.wired.com/2014/01/how-to-hack-okcupid/

Your post could be a personals ad of sorts but you stopped short of inviting readers to reach out directly and inquire about a date

I mean go ahead with your plan, but if that's been your "strategy" for however long and you're still single and without the trophy kids, you're "strategy" is severely flawed and obviously not working.

Why does this translate as an achievement for a resumé rather than a heart longing?

Just imagine that wording being on a dating profile. Yeah, you'd get some responses and sure, maybe it works out, but upon reading that I'd put money down and bet that it'd scare away a huge number of potential winners (min 30% compared to better wording). It's because it sounds too robotic, calculated, blueprint-like, and signals up-tight, controlling, another job to work at after coming home from their day job. The opposite is needed.

Guys get scared off when they hear things like that. It has nothing to do with a strong and empowered woman. It's got everything to do with affecting their freedom to be themselves, hang with their boys, and just not feel like they'd be put on a leash and treated like a prop. Guys, typically speaking, just want to be bros with whoever, regardless of gender, and just chill and not worry about being constrained.

Do what you want, but at least don't go by the advice you want to hear here. Go by what you need to hear here.

Maybe it’s because someone else’s feelings are involved too? And they may not want to be a pawn in your plan?

We're only humans after all.

if you want to listen to that advice - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1WiCGq-PcY&t=1s

Additionally, you're asking some very nerdy nerds this advice on a Saturday of a long weekend. The population sample here is biased as hell.

Also, lets face it, men are pigs. And without a picture of you, we're all just guessing as to real reasons why. And, no, that doesn't mean I want a pic of you, please don't do that, please keep your privacy on HN. No pics.

Ok, that all said:

> I think that women are learning to take charge in every aspect of their lives. Why not relationships?

Men, bad as it is, don't want superwoman. Especially the men you're looking for in Austin. They want to take care of their woman and their families. I've read a few of your comments on here, but not all. And you come off as driven and very very smart. It's awesome.

That's generally a good thing, but likely not here based on your self reported failure.

Partnerships, sure. That's great. But men want to be men. And that mean the 3 P's: Provider, Protector, Procreator. If you have all three, you can be a 'real man' and participate in the great game of male honor. If you have only two Ps, you better be really good at them. If you only have one, you're not a real man and can't participate in male honor groups. Yeah, yeah, caveats all over the place. But, generally, you gotta have the three P's to be a 'real man'.

That you are a founder and a kick-ass, take-names, kinda gal is great. But it takes away the P of Provider part of being a man. Doing some real bad projection here, you likely make more than him, or will soon if all goes to plan. That means, to him, you're prospectively taking away some part of his manhood and honor. Also, he's likely reading into the reality that there just isn't a lot of time for another person in your life outside of your business. We all read here on HN how hard founder life is and how much of a time suck it is.

This one is less of an issue, maybe, I dunno. You mention crossfit and the like. That's awesome, you're doing a great job of working on your health and fitness. Keep doing that. But, depending on how big and fit you are, that takes away the P of Protector. He's not the person that can protect his family from the wolves at the cabin door. You both may be. That's awesome when wolves actually are at the cabin door. But he's trying to imagine his future with you, fantasize about what may be. Sharing that role of Protector may not be what he wants to fantasize about.

The last one is maybe the biggest issue and unfortunately the least changeable. The role of Procreator. You're 41. I'm not going to lie to you, the stats on procreation at as advanced maternal age as yourself are not the worst, but they are not the best either. Geriatric pregnancies like the one you are aiming to have come with a lot of risks and side effects on the child. That's pretty common knowledge. Men that you are looking for are aware that having children with you is a more risky proposition than with the, to borrow a baseball term, average replacement. Meaning that, clone you exactly but 10 years younger, it's less risk to go with the younger clone in terms of child health. I know, that's really pretty brutal. I'm sorry, it's fucking bullshit. But by being older than younger-clone-you, you essentially lessen the third P of Procreator.

So, what to do then?

Like I said, you have to have all three to be a real man, or be really good at at least two. I feel that you're pretty dead set on the Procreator role for your man. That's totally cool. I have kids too. They are awesome, more people should have them. They filled a hole in me that I wasn't aware that I had. But with your age, understand that means he's going to count that one as a 'less' role for himself. You need to build him up on the other two.

So for the Provider one, you kinda gotta aim for men that make more than you, are otherwise really good at hunting/fishing/outdoors stuff and take that really seriously, or are really good at scrapping, knowing the right people, grifting, etc. He's gotta feel like he's able to Provide for you, that you depend only on him for your future and your financial security. Because the P of Procreator is lessened, you have to heighten this one. Being a kick-ass start-up founder, yeah, this is going to be a tough one for you to navigate. Honestly, I'd go for the outdoorsy types as the financial stuff is going to be messy. You can kinda let this P be a 'less' overall, but not as much as the Procreator one.

So, for the Protector one, as I said at the start, you gotta drop the handkerchief. I think this is the one you can have the most success with. Be more of a damsel in distress for him. Yeah, I know, it's not the most modern-orthodox idea. But you need to build these men up as being able to take the role of Protector as the main role for them in the realtionship. You have to make him feel really truly huge as a Protector for you. Aim for the bulkier gym rat guys, maybe veterans or active duty men that can 'Provide/r' a really good healthcare and retirement plan, and again the outdoorsy hunters with lot of guns. You're in Austin, there are a lot of gun start-ups there, take advantage of that. Talk up how unsafe you feel about town, how your ex was abusive or something, how you really like a guy that can take care of you in a fight. Strange as it sounds, be easily startled.

In short, drop the handkerchief. I think it's your best bet.

Best of luck! I hope all goes well and I look forward to seeing a post on here from you about how it all turned out great! You got this girl!

You are essentially asking op to change who she is to fit into an outdated model of the world.

Moreover the person she finds will likely be completely incompatible for her and even abusive toward her.

This is bad advice

The 3Ps model comes from Gilmore's 1991 book Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity. It's a dense read and very well researched. The 3Ps comes out of the studies on male honor and that culture and how they are all linked together. Very few societies do not have male honor cultures. And yes, not all males participate in their honor culture, but as a consequence they are not considered 'real men' in their culture. The culture of men in Texas very much has the 3Ps defining a 'real man'.

https://www.amazon.com/Manhood-Making-Cultural-Concepts-Masc...

As for asking OP to change, welp, yeah. I mean, she's literally asking HN what she needs to change to get a man to settle with her.

I don't see why they would be abusive at all. The Protector role is the literal opposite of that. A 'real man' protects his family and loved ones, he does not harm them. This is in part why wife-beaters and child abusers are so reviled in the culture and courts of Texas.

Hopefully the book will be a good summer read for you. Thanks again!

Its better to filter out people who don’t accept you for who you are rather than bend over backwards to try to appease someone. If you are a kickass woman entrepreneur then lean into that and find someone who admires that quality in you.

In regards to the potentially abusive situation, let me elaborate: If a man needs a woman to be weaker than him, in my mind that is toxic and potentially abusive. Best filter these people out from the beginning by being honest with yourself and them

I’d be curious to hear from men here if they identify with this and feel un attracted to a woman providing for herself.

Many thanks again for your thoughts and being positive and affirming .

I couldn’t give two shits about some weird notion of being a provider or a protector. Income, strength? It doesn’t come into the equation for me. But then, I also don’t have a strong need to be a procreator.

I have no success dating due to my own seemingly excessive standards (almost impossible to find deep thinkers) so I can’t give any advice on that front.

But you shouldn’t rule out being a single mother, because I suspect you’d regret that once it’s no longer possible.

I was brought up by 2 working parents and all my siblings are working professionals; I expect my partner to "pull her weight". Damsel's in distress are a huge turn-off for me,and having that imbalance feels icky and transactional on some level - to me.

But I know men who exclusively date women with lower academic qualifications than them, because they want that income gradient/clear pecking-order.

No, I don’t identify in the slightest. The opposite is true. I find interest in someone who can be a partner in the true sense of the word. We should strive to improve each other and remain together by choice, because we’re happy, not because one of us has a small ego and the other is incapable of being independent. What a boring scenario.

That said, I don’t doubt it does happen. A friend has told me of a man she dated who couldn’t get over the fact she earned more than him. Unsurprisingly, they didn’t last. She’s much happier now, in a healthy relationship.

Is finding someone so important that you’d consider presenting as someone you are not? Sounds like a recipe to attract a partner you’d regret choosing.

Personally, I think you just need to give up (that's what I did) and just learn to be okay with the things the way they are now. It either will happen or not. You just cannot force these things.

Also (probably not such a great advice) but maybe you just need to go to a bar and meet a guy who is a little bit of an asshole..?

But I also 100% don't want to make kids, so probably not your target audience.

I'd actually be open to the idea of raising kids, parenting, adopting, etc., I just don't want to make them.

Not offering myself, but it's entirely possible there are men with similar preferences (or who had a vasectomy, etc.).. are you overlooking them as possible matches? Because you could have your relationship and your kids, and if there's no pressure on being the bio-dad within any time-frame, maybe that takes pressure off relationship candidates also

As for the protector… it does not matter how buff you are, in 99% of the time your average male will still be more able to fight off a physical threat. But yes, there are men who feel inferior because of being less fit. And there are men, who will applaud it and have no trouble lifting less weight than you. Guess who is more self confident…

About the procreation: that one I could imagine. If you want to badly have kids as a man, or want to badly leave that option for the future, you’d probably pick a spouse with enough “runway”. But there are also many guys who rather enjoy the money and don’t want kids.

I would never marry a woman that can’t provide for herself, and I think it would be amazing if she earns more than me.

However, I don’t think it’s completely wrong, men do want to feel needed somehow.

You seems so perfect and the only thing missing in your life it’s a child. That’s not a good advertisement.

Let men feel needed and tell them that, ask for their help and their opinion. If a guy is real computer nerd, let him help with your IT related issues, and sure, you could probably pay someone to do it better, but the point is to let people/men feel as part of your life.

What is missing in your life beside a child?

Are you too serious? Look for a funny guy that can make you laugh.

Are you too healthy maniac? Look for a guy that can sometimes push you to really tasty food, but not healthy.

Are you too impulsive? Look for a guy that keep you grounded.

And let them know how they complete you!

Some of us find career driven, go get it attitude attractive. It all depends on how grounded you are.

two thoughts that came up:

- your 3 Ps sounds like a lot like I imaging older generations (older than me, mid20). Do you think this is changing with newer generations? As you said, this all is pretty much bullshit...

- From what OP said, she's more on the intellectual side. Men (or human in general) on this side might be more open and doesn't follow the cave man 'uga-uga' mentality

To answer your ?s and speak to your comment:

- Short answer: Probably never. The 3Ps theory is well established in academic masculinist studies. A good overview of the 3Ps comes from Gilmore's 1991 book Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity if you want to learn more. Very briefly, all males conform to these Ps to participate in male honor. Yes, many males do not, but they are then without honor, and therefore considered not 'real' men in their culture. Honor is redefined here to encompass more than just the classical concept and is more a pan-male term, it gets a bit wonky. Man is also generally defined as 'not a boy', not 'not a woman'(sorry for all the nots here). The book does a much better job at introducing the ideas than a little HN comment could. In the end, I fail to see how any generation is going to escape ~200,000 years of human history. I could be very very wrong though!

https://www.amazon.com/Manhood-Making-Cultural-Concepts-Masc...

- It's not caveman, it's a theory of how men work in their culture and in almost all cultures we know of (the book goes into the exceptions and how they 'prove the rule' essentially). In the culture of Texas, 'real men' possess these three Ps, or at least have 2 Ps in above average amounts. HN isn't the best place to really dive into it, as most of the men here have above average Provider traits due to the income from tech jobs. It kinda blinds them to men that have to rely on the Protector and Procreator roles for their honor. I want to stress, Provider is not just income.

OP being a selector, and not a selectee, changes the equation a lot, of course. However, understanding the psychology of the men she is dating and their need of the 3Ps may help her address why her strategy is failing. Fluffing up the Protector role, or choosing men that have a lot of strengths in that role, may lead to more success.

Bad advice, badly misinformed, all around. And lying to your intended is not a good recommendation:

- Crime in Austin is down and the town is incredibly left-leaning despite being in Texas. Your real problem is finding a single heterosexual male willing to procreate who has matching political views (unless you don't mind the difference),

- "Lot of gun start-ups there (Austin)" - incredible!

- The likelihood of getting in a fight in Austin, indeed, most anywhere, is slim: talking about such marks you as paranoid. [Chicago, maybe less paranoid!]. And, as everyone knows, in Texas we don't fight - we shoot each other [just joking!]. But again, pretending to fear a fight is lying.

That aside, my one question to you is why aren't you married yet - why have you rejected those men you've met who are willing to marry?

And finally, consider:

- moving to Utah (where everyone will make it their task to find you a suitable partner - they're very good at this and the Mormons are wonderful people). And Utah is a fantastic place to raise children. Hard to get good coffee there sometimes though.

- dating foreign nationals who need citizenship. Many would be surprised and pleased that you want to have children. [OTOH they might worry about your age (or their mother would!8-)).]

How’s that working out for you?

Instead, you seem quite and transactional and check-list oriented.

Has there not been a man you’ve met for whom you’ve simply fallen head over heels in love? A man that suddenly makes all your strategic-thinking utterly irrelevant? I have no tips for how to find such a guy. But, I would bet that IF you find your soulmate, it will come out of the blue and, perhaps, he’ll meet very very few of your criteria. And, you won’t care in the slightest as you will have found in him a host of qualities that you suddenly realize you can’t live without.

Good luck.

Practical advice? Stay off the apps… I’ll risk the downvotes by saying the obvious: you don’t want the kind of guy who uses dating apps. You want the kind of guy you bump into in person, walking the dog.

In short, find a guy your attracted to, and flirt. It’s your superpower as a woman: regrettably, most women seem to have no idea how much control they have in finding a mate. Your last line about men being strategic in dating is wrong. We are not. Instead, most men are just waiting and hoping and praying that a woman will smile at them and start a flirtatious conversation.

*edit*I don’t think I was clear. Your problem isn’t getting dates… I get that. You probably know how to flirt quite well. I guess what I’m saying is that once you have the guy, make it romantic. Your superpower (more downvotes incoming) is your ability (and most women’s ability) to make a guy do whatever you want. Hell, many guys are dead-set against getting married… until I woman gets them to completely change their mind. It’s cliche in fact. You don’t need to find a guy who wants kids, in other words; you need only find a guy who wants to make you happy. Once you find that guy, you’re set— his pre-you opinions, goals, dreams, and sometimes even religion, is irrelevant at that point… we’re quite malleable, you know, and not nearly as set in our ways or strategic as you might think.

I'm not American and nobody I know in a committed relationship, not a single one (even the Americans I know), met their partner through dating (where I'm defining "dating" as meeting with strangers or near-strangers with the intent of evaluating a possible romantic connection).

For the most part, my own relationship and the relationships around me started as friendships. People encounter others organically, through some hobby, club, group, event with a mutual friend or something like that. They talk a bit, they (platonically) like each other, they (platonically) hang out just because they enjoy each other's company.

Only after properly getting to know each other (think years, not weeks or months) is romance considered.

So I'd suggest that instead of going broad but incredibly shallow with over a hundred meetings with strangers, try going narrow but deep. Try to make a few male friends that you know and feel comfortable with and see if you find yourself wanting more from any of them.

Even if you don't find romance from any of them, you end up with more friends. They likely have friends of their own that you can also befriend and the cycle continues.

Dating apps never worked to me because I was inexperienced and wanted to take my time to get to know the person (I mean like meeting a few times over a few weeks or months), but on dating apps there is this commonly shared nonsense that the first date and impression must all be perfect, or it's doomed.

My advice would be to make friends, spend as much time as you can outside (or meetups when friends are not an option) meeting random people in various contexts.

Also a couple of considerations:

- Love at first sight is a trap. It is more likely that 'the one' will seem 'meh' to you at first. You need to meet people multiple times to get to know them.

- Don't only meet people that are potential dating material. It is very important not to have this mindset, because it affects your behavior and image negatively. Socializing with people of both genders and all ages is also a very important part of that.

Plus you get to vet people before creating any expectations of an outcome.

By contrast, there are plenty of kids who are alone and would be grateful if someone gives the the love of parents. There are already here, no need to bring more. Why is having shared genes is necessary if you just want to love a child?

1. Do things you like 2. Where would the guy you want to date go to socialize?

I've met some really interesting people at maker spaces. Never dated anyone there.

I always thought habitat for humanity would be cool/useful/fun/have interesting people, but they don't do it around here.

I haven't been, but you might try https://austinswingsyndicate.org/

I always make better friends when I'd go places regularly. When I was younger, I'd hop around to a new place frequently. I didn't build lasting friendships this way. Find something you'd like to do for a while.

Volunteering to help out at events can lead to meeting more people.

Might work. It works with happiness.

How many different men did you go on the 120 dates with? How many men asked for second or third dates? Of these, how many did you accept? How many men did you ask for a second date? Assuming you get a second or third date, what typically ends the relationship?

There's really too little to go on here, but I've found a few common themes among other people who struggle with dating:

- They overrate their value on the dating market and set their sights on people out of their league.

- They're attracted to people who are bad fits in other ways. They may focus on winning over people who just aren't interested in them. Or they're attracted to people who have no intention of settling down with anyone. (EDIT: You wrote below that you set you're range from 30-50. That seems like a good sign that you're not being overly picky. Although, I would wager most 30 year old men setting up online dates with 40 year old women are looking for sex and not marriage).

- They spread themselves too thin, begin treating people like a commodity, and don't put effort into developing meaningful relationships, instead jumping from date to date hoping for love at first sight. You might be playing it like a numbers game, and that can be antithetical to building relationships. Online dating can make it worse, since it's so easy to just move on to the next person.

Also, it's unfortunately just much harder to date at 40+. The people who want to be married often are married by that age. You'll catch people on the rebound from divorces, but they're not always ready to jump back into a marriage. It's not impossible, it's just harder.

EDIT: I just thought of an online dating suggestion from my own experience. Use recent photos that are flattering but realistic. When I was in my mid-30s, I my hair began thinning and I didn't update my photos because I was so self-conscious. And as my hair loss progressed, my dates started going worse and worse. When a woman called me out on it, I finally updated my photos. After that, my dates had realistic expectations and I was no longer losing their trust right off the bat, and things improved immediately.

Some dealbreaker’s of their’s - never married no kids degree makes 6 figures texan (even though she is in colorado) makes 7-8 figures a year (I kid you not, $1-10M / yr) dog lover vegan wants kids

The list continues for these women. There will always be some ‘red flag’, that disqualifies their potential partner.

Meanwhile, a man just wants - attractive, good in bed, and it’d be nice if she cooks.

Today, women want it all. I don’t think men are built to be the perfect partner and best friend.

I want someone kind, loyal, good in bed, happy, smart enough and yes, I’ll admit eager to grow and learn as a person.

Don’t care a wit about six figures, vegan , though all my married women friends say I should !! :)

If I'm right about running a startup, or something of that nature of leadership, you may want to consider looking for someone that's funny and interesting, rather than smart. If you look at your male counterparts who have found marriage success, I bet you will find plenty of un-equall 'intelligence', measured by their achievements anyway. But this doesn't make them bad partners, often it makes even better actually.

It's not too often you find doctor couples, that's all I'm saying.

Since she had no father, I suggest the Mr.Right must be somebody not only husband but also the father, irrespective of his age, i.e.must be the image of father the little girl has - the smartest man on the earth, the strongest man on the earth, etc etc....

A basic ability to carry on a conversation and make decisions based on data would be nice

By the way, you can't tick the "working on yourself" box by doing "therapy, support groups, meditation, dating coaching, yoga and hypnotism". These are just activities, and I'd say at least equally prone to make you a worse person as to improve you. The best way to work on yourself is to be in a healthy, dynamic relationship with someone that doesn't think you're insufferable. The compromises and attitude adjustments you'll have to make to keep the relationship going are invaluable learning (and humbling) experiences that no book or yoga teacher will ever teach you. And this is my advice to you, someone who's in his early 50s, divorced, happily remarried with kids from both marriages.

It seems to me you're trying to dive before learning to swim. I would forget kids for the next 1-3 years, and focus on finding someone to be in a deep relationship with. Even if that doesn't work out, you'll be a lot better off afterwards regarding working on yourself. That will also make you a better parent.

No offense OP - I don't know you and I'm not making a statement around you specifically, but more just the conclusions one could draw in general about a person that has posted the information you've posted. I wish you well.

Makes sense.

Since she had no father, I suggest the Mr.Right must be somebody not only husband but also the father, irrespective of his age, i.e.must be the image of father the little girl has - the smartest man on the earth, the strongest man on the earth, etc etc....

i can vouch for this 100%. growing up with a single parent of the same gender does make you subconsciously look for that missing parent. and a part of the challenge is that you don't even know what you should be looking for, so you look for something that you imagine, but you most often end up with someone who is like the other parent that you do know.

The smartest people I know think they're the dumbest person in the room. Your above response is very indicative of the kind of vibe you give to the men you date.

If you can't find a man who's as smart as you, that reflects on the pool of people you surround yourself with, not the intelligence of the men you can't find.

Your sort of thought will usually manifest itself in unconscious behaviour on dates, and will be a turn-off to the men you date. In the same way that many people can't detect the smell on their own bodies, you too likely won't know how abrasive your behaviour might be to others. I know a woman who has professed the same thoughts as you do (in a more humblebrag manner) and she has had extreme difficulties in finding a man to marry despite extreme efforts at such.

Upon reading your post, it appears highly likely you are overestimating how clever you are.

Also, do not forget that almost nobody seeks a long term relationship (of the "looking for a mate" kind) where they do not feel "needed".

Another factor to consider is that grandiosity is often a symptom of a deep unmet need from childhood.

I hope you learn the humility which is necessary to find what you are looking for. Good luck!

That does sound really arrogant but I can understand it. It may be that at your core you believe you know what is right, and no one knows better. So you’ll never find someone that is as smart as you, because in your mind that meter is pegged at maximum.

But you still need someone you can respect. And remember that even if someone is not a smart as you in one way, they may be wiser and more capable in other ways that you can respect. Mutual respect is what is important in the end IMO.

I am not speaking hypothetically. It was a real problem for me when my ex-wife lost her job, gave up looking for another, and just... turned herself into a housewife. I could not relate to her anymore. This was not the issue which ultimately broke our marriage, but it certainly didn't help.

I'm really sorry to hear about your troubles with your ex-wife. I can imagine it could be really depressing/invalidating to lose a job and not know where to turn. Luckily, as a single person, we don't really have the option of not working so there's an energy and force behind finding a vocation.

I sometimes think in a different reality, I might enjoy teaching and raising children while my husband worked. It's a ton of work though and you don't really get any down time, which is hard.

I did this before when I was dating someone who had a son, but I also worked. I still found it very fulfilling.

When I was a teacher, I always found the kids who were the most grounded were the ones who had a stay-at-home dad.

I think it's nice for kids when one parent is there just for the child rearing.

Some random thoughts and musings, but it's really really tough when both people don't have interests outside the marriage.

I'm sorry you and your ex had to go through this.

You're in a bubble, too, whether you see its boundaries or not. In order to speak meaningfully about what the "vast majority" of people want, we would need some actual research.

i don't want to analyze or criticize your feelings, but since i may face a similar situation, i'd like to explore how to avoid that for myself.

i do want my wife to be an equal too, but how can she be if she is not working like me?

a couple of thoughts come to mind: (these are random ideas, i don't know if they all make sense)

there is a school of thought that says that housework should be treated like any other respectable fulltime job.

like in a startup, there are fun tasks and boring gruntwork. i am doing the programming work for the customers, which brings in the money and my businesspartner is managing the accounting, invoices and takes care of the office. we are saving the expense for a janitor, so we do cleanup ourselves, and since i am busy on the computer, it's mostly done by my partner (i remember reading about a CEO who said being a janitor was part of his duties)

so to translate that to a family, like a business, there are a number of things that need to be done. someone may be focusing on doing the work that brings in the money, and the other person is doing all those other things.

the point is, all those tasks are equally important for the success of a business as they are for a family. we would not consider a CEO to be less valued than the CTO, so why should the housewife be considered unequal to her money earning husband?

we are a team, where each of us is valued the same, but that doesn't mean we have to split the work equally too. instead everyone contributes according to their ability.

i think what your problem may have been that you simply were unprepared for the change and didn't know how to deal with it. i don't know how i am going to deal with that either, but at least i know it will most likely be happening so i'll do my best to prepare.

a few more thoughts of what could help to achive equality when one partner is not working:

make decisions together. especially about spending money. care for each others goals and interests outside of work and housework. in other words, take each other seriously, regardless of what the other is contributing. treat the housework as enabling your outside work, just like the CEO enables the CTO.

Speak for yourself… it’s a very outdated view… it’s some sh!tty legacy code frequently causing problems - that badly needs rewriting.

And someone more intelligent / independent wouldn’t go for that arrangement you laid out.

I was absolutely looking for a partner, and I did not care even a little whether she cooked. And physical attractiveness is extremely subjective and not the highest on my list (although obviously it is important). But to each their own I guess.

You might actually WANT a 2nd hand man, because those who have had a family before would have less qualms doing it again (if they have the means) and can decide fast knowing what they are getting into.

What you are short on is time, but I assume you don't want to compromise either. Someone who is widowed or divorce (that's not his fault) isn't a compromise in his quality as an individual, but one of time and some resources. But he would very much appreciate a mature woman who is open to his family.

Not gonna lie: if I didn't have kids and was single, I'd shoot for early 30's max until I was into my 50's. Unless you were a knockout who is just better than me (but then you wouldn't want me either). But having kids changes that equation immensely, because I'd appreciate the partner aspect much more because there is less pressure to have multiple kids.

41 isn't that old, and by this age there are more divorced than never married.

If someone has never had a serious relationship by the time they're 33 or so, it's a red flag 100% of the time in my experience.

> And love you for being so active in this discussion ! I’m inviting you to my wedding metadat:)

Aww I'm honored, and FYI- I literally just sent out the invites for mine this coming August :D Cheers!

So the story is now for a woman to work hard, go to school, work / become a “boss bi*” and be independent. Don’t need a man! You go girl!

So this woman reaches a local maxima in career and by her 30s starts to question the narrative she’s bought into. Except Father Time has taken its toll, and what was once a healthy fruitful person is slowly turning into a dry fruit.

A successful career woman, will want to find a partner who’s her equal or better. So she’s now targeting someone who’s:

mid-30s+ * at same income or higher * single

Except this dreamy man who fits the criteria is looking for :

* woman in 20s * income ? Who cares?

So now our boss lady is left sad and mad at the false narrative she’s been fed her whole life. A couple more years pass and whatever fake dreams of “I heard IVF is really good now!” Are long gone.

Free lunches don’t exist.

Based on my experience, dating is absolutely a market driven by a typical economy of supply and demand, and the supply of "good enough" men who want to settle down with a woman is virtually unlimited for virtually any woman out there, in virtually any major US metro area. This means that the problem might be in yourself, and my guess is:

- Men perceive you as "weirdo". For example, going on a first date and immediately stating that you are looking to have kids since your time is "running out" would be a red flag even to the most desperate men.

- (I bet my money on this) You are too picky, even if you don't think you are, and the only men you're interested in are the ones who have an overwhelming abundance of choice (e.g. top 5% in terms of earning, looks, status), and as such are not in any pressure to settle down with you.

And thank you even more for taking the time to share your advice with me. Your time is precious and the fact you’d take time for me who you don’t even know means a lot.

So….

With regards to your first point, I am definitely a weirdo and proud of it! One of my favorite teachers says, “weird is wonderful !” Who else but a bonafide weirdo would post such ah intimate post about their dating life and deepest hopes and fears for children and marriage in such a public setting as Hacker News. Oddly enough, despite being a proud weirdo, I find almost every guy I go out with wants to see me again. So that’s cool, and I appreciate that! I think it’s partly because I’m grounded and kind, and partly because I’m pretty, rarely because I feel truly seen and appreciated for being the delightful weirdo I am.

With regards to your second point, I can’t tell you how much I loathe the word, “picky” which I find to be used so much when in comes to dating and by so many people in this thread. Can’t we at least say “selective”? The word picky makes me think of someone picking their nose not picking a partner.

I think that what people are actually implying when they say “picky” is that I’m materialistic , that I’m looking for a rich guy, for a hot guy, etcetera.

While at times, like most human beings, I am sure I dismissed someone wonderful for the wrong reasons and really missed out, overall I do not believe this to be the case.

I’m looking for a kind man, for an honest man, for a loyal man, for a man I’m physically attracted to, yes, but I think that can also grow with time.

I think that I’ve fallen in love with many a man I didn’t like immediately and so I find myself gravitating more towards advice of friends first then be less selective on such an important decision than life partner.

Would anyone say that someone is being too selective on choosing their CTO ? What can be more important than life partner ?

That said, I think you do need to find a balance. Using your CTO example: if you only interview a single person, you're certainly not selective enough. But if you spend over a year and interview 100+ qualified candidates and still haven't found a mutual fit, then yeah maybe you're being too selective, or just not realistic about how you stack up against the competition.

There's a saying in hiring that you might have heard that says "hire for strength, not lack of weakness". That might apply well in your case too as a way to kind of mentally smooth over accepting someone that maybe doesn't meet all your standards. Like maybe they're well below your physical attractiveness standards or not well spoken, but they're incredibly kind or funny or interesting to talk to.

If you're pursuing a guy that you would have also been interested in when you were 28 and in your physical prime, well, that probably means you've got a lot of competition that will be tough to overcome. Perhaps a weird way to think about it, but it's better if there's something faintly eww about him from your 28 year old self's perspective, that you're now willing to look past.

Anyway, I really wish you luck. You seem like a great person and it's a shame that simply by the mistake of waiting a bit too long in the biological game, you're in a tough spot. While men have their own set of challenges, we don't have to deal with a deadline on figuring these things out.

It's an expression that has been used for a long time, and I don't even see that much difference between the word picky and selective (maybe because I'm not native English speaker, but in my language they are translated the same).

My favourite TED talk pairing is Dan Gilbert's Surprising Science of Happiness[1], where he offers evidence upon evidence that we humans grow to like what we are stuck with and can't change. A year after winning the lottery and a year after losing the use of their legs, lottery winners and paraplegics report being equally happy with their lives, one of his studies shows, for example. And Barry Schwartz's Paradox of Choice talk[2] where he argues that the more choice we have, the less happy we will be after we made the choice, full of doubt whether we could or should have chosen better, questioning if we should choose again, and seeing any flaw in the choice as a reason to blame ourselves for choosing it.

In the USA there's over two million marriages every year[3], that seems a lot for people making the most important decision of their lives, to me.

> "I think that what people are actually implying when they say “picky” is that I’m materialistic , that I’m looking for a rich guy, for a hot guy, etcetera."

(I think that's different from common usage; a 'picky eater' is not someone looking for rich food or hot food, it's someone with a narrowband filter on what foods they will eat. By contrast, there's a joke about the shopkeeper who gets a bag of potatoes, splits them into two different containers, and marks one container "selected potatoes" with a higher price. 'Selective' means you selected, even people whose criteria is 'the first person I see' are selecting!)

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q1dgn_C0AU

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO6XEQIsCoM

[3] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/marriage_rate_2018/marr...

If you’ve been searching for 3 years and the list of 120 viable candidates have been exhausted all because the CEO “wasn’t feeling it” with every single candidate while they each go on to become successful CTO’s of other companies. The yes, yes of cause everyone would say that they where being too selective on choosing their CTO.

the only way out that i see is that both partners recognize the challenge and find the opportunity to work through these questions together, which btw is already a good way to work out if you can cooperate.

being able to cooperate, for me is now the most important quality in my relationship. if we can work together on reaching each others goals, we can solve the problems that get in the way.

ironically that is the same quality that's most important in the relationship of company founders.

> You are too picky, even if you don't think you are.

Agreed. Actionable advice to OP would be to compromise and narrow down core requirements for a partner.

https://smile.amazon.com/Marry-Him-Case-Settling-Enough/dp/0... (Amazon: Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough)

https://openlibrary.org/works/OL8109804W/Marry_him?edition=i... (Open Library: Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough)

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-h... (The original Atlantic piece that was the genesis of the above book)

https://smile.amazon.com/Science-Happily-Ever-After-Enduring... (The Science of Happily Ever After: What Really Matters in the Quest for Enduring Love)

I don’t think I’m being too picky. I’d wont share the reasons I didn’t go out again with 90% of these guys but it would horrify you and violate my privacy and theirs. I always cross-check with a trusted friend on whatever my reason is.

And I’ve logged them all so I can go back and learn and grow from my past experiences

Some people are way too picky, it's impossible to know if that's the case here or not, we don't have enough information.

i disagree. that is something that i would want to know up front. yes, it may put off some people. but if the person is put off by that they are not likely to be a good candidate anyways in my eyes.

if you really want kids, then time is running out, and both need to be aware of that. i'd consider not stating that up front but bringing it up later an unfair bait-and-switch. if both are not on board with taking this biological limitation into account, then that's not going to work.