Currently single, dipping my toes back into Internet dating after 18 months off.
I don’t mind being by myself – in fact, I recently started working from home and now I’m home all alone for long stretches. I like the quiet and the free time, and I have plenty to keep myself occupied. And I already have a kid, who lives here part of the time, and a few single friends locally (and more less locally), so I’m not quite ready to be typing manifestos in my plywood cabin. My life is pretty settled in terms of work and where I live, at least for the 10 years until my daughter graduates high school. I could live this life for 10 more years, no problem. But I can’t help think that so many things are better shared – and not just sex (although judging by my daydreaming I miss that more than candlelight dinners and Scrabble). And at my age (42), so many of my friends have paired off that it’s harder and harder to rely upon the remaining single ones to keep you socialized. (Married people never go out. Married people with kids really never go out.)
I think dating in your 40s and up is quite a tangle, though. How do two 40-year-olds who own homes in different towns decide to move in together? Or spend more than one or two nights a week together? What if they both have kids? I have received messages on the dating site from recently divorced women with very young kids, women with teenagers who’ve been single for a while, women in their early 30s who “never” want kids, women in their mid-40s with no kids who are still holding out hope. Each of these presents a very different situation. Stuff that wouldn’t necessarily be clear on date 3 or date 19, but after 6 months or a year.
A friend of mine took offense when I commented that I’m looking for someone with lowered expectations, but it’s kind of true – I think the whole romantic picture of sweeping someone off their feet and creating the kind of seamless team that some people have described here seems like a real long shot in middle age. And I can’t really say it’s what I want anyway.
[QUOTE=Sleeps with Butterflies]
The idea of a perfect “SO” for me is someone I’m attracted to for a sexual type relationship and casual dating if we feel like it. No taking all of each other’s time or any of that. A lot of my female friends say “That shouldn’t be hard to find.” but you’d be surprised how many guys get jealous and want more from you.
[/QUOTE]
People have a hard time talking about this kind of thing face-to-face. Even a guy who would normally leap at the offer will think, “Wait a minute – she’s a chick! Shouldn’t she be calling me every 15 minutes?” Exactly how do you say “I’d like to spend a little less time with you” without offending someone? It’s maybe the hardest thing to do in a relationship – retain independence without pushing the other person away.
[QUOTE=tremorviolet]
Every time I get the somewhat sporadic urge to date, I try to think about what I want out of a relationship. And every answer I can come up with is pretty selfish: someone to go to dinner and the movies with, sex, someone who makes me feel good. I’m rarely considering the other person and what they’re looking for.
[/QUOTE]
This just sounds like dating to me – “Can this person make me happy?” seems like a reasonable starting point. You have to start somewhere. I think the problem with maybe 85% of women’s profiles on Match.com is that they are selling the relationship 15 years down the line, when what they should be selling is the first date. It’s hard to sound like a fun date when all you have to say is that a relationship is built on trust and you don’t play games. Um, OK. What else will be talk about, then? The engine that drives this kind of thing (for me, anyway, and for a lot of guys and I suspect a lot of women, too) really is a mixture of lust and that (majority) part of flirting that appeals to your brain (don’t think there’s a word for that, is there?). Any considerations about making the other person happy for the rest of their lives should come later. If it never does, that’s a whole 'nother discussion.
