Mar21

Where Are All the Emotionally Available, Mentally Healthy Men?

03:52 pm on Mar 21st 2007 Evan Marc Katz

Filed Under Sex & Relationship Advice

Tags: age, emotionally available, men, reader question, single women

Read More...

• The Secret to Love: Mr. Imperfect is Actually Mr. Right
• Best of Evan Marc Katz’s Advice From a Single Dating Expert
• If Men Like Only Hot Women, Where Does That Leave an Average Woman Like Me?
• Am I Foolish For Waiting For A Non-Committal Man To Commit?
• If I’m a Great Woman, Why Haven’t I Met Anyone Else Great?

Related Resources

• 1000 Questions for Couples
• How to Approach Women
• 500 Lovemaking Tips & Secrets

109 Responses to “Where Are All the Emotionally Available, Mentally Healthy Men?”

1. JimmyE Apr 3rd 2007 at 08:39 pm 1

   Everyone talks about how middle aged men want to date younger women, but take a look at some twentysomething profiles and you’ll notice how many are willing to date men up to twenty years older then them, but rule out candidates born 12 months after them.
   That’s their perogative, but i can’t help but wonder how many women dated older men in their twenties, and then complained that their peers considered them too old 10 years later.

2. Vicki Apr 5th 2007 at 06:30 pm 2

   JimmyE,
   I am 38, and I adore younger men. I have had a crush on a younger guy (he looks about 17 or 18, but I don’t dare ask him!) who works as a waiter at a restaurant I frequent with my parents. I actually have a mental block about dating older men, even a couple of years older seems so very very old to me! lol I think it is just each person has their own tastes you know. Unfortunately, society praises the older man-younger woman pairings, and disparages older women-younger men pairings. The pressure can be a bit daunting. Many people who are cool about seeing gay couples out together are openly horrified if they see a woman out with a younger man. Why is that??? It is the final frontier, in my opinion, and I guess I want to be a trailblazer! lol. So, not all women exclude younger men. I only wish more of them would date me!

   Vicki

3. Hadley Page Jul 12th 2007 at 09:24 am 3

   Evan Has hit it on the head. We want easy.

   First some back ground. I am a. 49 yr old lawyer, divorced w 2 kids that I have 1/2 time. I am relatively sane, relatively reasonable & considerate, relatively presentable, relatively fun & entertaining and relatively financially secure. And yes, I have my fair share of issues just like everyone else.

   I don’t have much of a problem meeting and dating women. But I do have a challenge meeting women that I am interested in having an LTR with. Why? Because at this point in my life I don’t want a women who is trying to change me> I don;t want hassles. I don’t want difficult. I want easy. After pondering this for a few years I have concluded that easy and pleasant are the 2 most important qualities in a women for me — More important that attractiveness, more important than great sex.

   In theory I have no issue with successful, intelligent women. But my experience has shown me that, as Evan says, they can often be anxious, self-righteous, negative, and entitled. (NOT EASY)

   Sorry, I wish it wasn’t true, but for me it seems to be.

   Ladies., if you want to get into an LTR you might consider thinking about what is really important for you and what you can live without.

   Hadley Page

4. Suze Jul 25th 2007 at 04:55 pm 4

   I’m coming into this discussion late.

   Have you noticed in this exchange that women’s behavior/demeanor etc is being put to blame here, and men are being let off scott free?

   Don’t get me wrong. I think it is quite valid to point out that older women who have developed higher standards should put a plug on their nagging harpie tendencies–if indeed that is truly how they are coming across.

   But is it?

   How are men coming across? Likeable? Confident? Mature? Chivalrous? Relationship material?

   The underlying message in the commentary here is that women are the ones who need to change their flawed behavior.

   Why? Because we want relationships more than men do?

   Here is the sad truth: more women, across the board, at all ages, are opting to be single because they do not like the quality of men out there.

   There are now more single women than married women and the numbers are expected to grow. This is an historical development

   the numbers are going to continue to grow until men elect to examine their own behavior and not put the responsibility of change squarely on women.

   So I guess there is going to be a whole lot of sexual frustration going on in both corners.

   c’est la vie.

5. Alison Aug 18th 2007 at 11:31 am 5

   Ah, Fun one.

   I think Evan is quite right, fair or not!

   Us fabulous, wonderful, sexy, and smart older women do need to learn to project oursleves in a more easy going manner.

   We need to also examine our expectations AND our preferences.

   Sadly statistics are NOT in aging women’s favor and so even MORE reason to learn to play more effectively and extend the playground. The keyword here is ‘play’ and being ‘playful’.

   Even if older, that attitude will help us appear as youthful and fun. (and we will feel and benefit from that too)

   Yes, our stage of life and what one is willing to embrace does effect the pool of possibilities.

   As one’s children are out of the home, one could maybe date a younger man who does not wish children, as well as an older man whose children are also gone. Also at that stage one may be more ‘easy-going’ and relaxed as pressures lift and priorities change.

   Christian Carter is a consultant to note, who speaks to what men want very clearly and understands a perspective of women. Like it or not, women should listen.

   In fact a woman should listen carefully to what each of the men she dates say, and can question (lightly and playfully) to seek to understand. She can also ask for feedback from male friends.

   That said, Suze is correct too. Many men want easy and simple - ’seamless’.

   Some are as deluded in their search as some women, not ready to realize that life itself is never seamless and it takes work to maintain and repair.

   They may find simple in a younger woman (at first) but as she matures, or feels sercurer in a relationship, she may start making more ‘demands’ and set more limits too. Also circumstances may make things more complex and the skill set a woman has to deal with this may become more important.

   ALL could benefit by examining preferences, willingness to flex, and to communicate better- in a more attentive and easy-going manner.

   Suze is right- many women choose to divorce and stay single because many men ARE so difficult and inflexible, and not fun or easy-going (remember Girls just want to have fun too)

   In the midst of so many work, family commitments, financial stressors- it is hard to be ‘easy-going’.

   The trick is finding a way to center still, flirt, maintain openess.

   Luck helps too. Also one’s skills at discrimination,

   As Evan says- great to keep being out there and not mistake lack of success as a sign that it is impossible , or to justify a judgment of the pool of ALL men.

   Sometimes we just don’t match up. C’est la vie.

   And the ones that reject us to enter a relationship of drama with someone else- well those are ones we may not want anyway. Don’t be jealous. It may not be happy for those two- nor last.

   I am 53 and 10 years post divorce, have at times felt hopeless, but have continued to be ‘out’ there, with my interests, with my family, online- wherever. It does take energy, creativity and means.

   I have recently begun a very hopeful relationship with a man who is early in the divorce process. Could be an issue but I determined it was worth a go. We are both aware of the potential pitfalls.

   So far we meet each others preferences and can match desires.

   The best part is we BOTH are taking personal responsibilty, are seeking balance in our own lives, COMMITTED to FUN, and not expecting perfection. We are each committed to creating beauty in our lives with each other and others- regardless of what lasts or does not last.

   Timing and luck has played a part in allowing this to unfold, willingness and grabbing opportunities another piece, and the rest has been the self-evaluation and growth we have undertaken before meeting. We are committed to continuing wherever it may lead.

   No guarantees-

   Best,
   Alison

   Also you may enjoy going to my blog and following links to some commentaries on Midlife dating, dating dilemmas, realistic or unrealistic preferences and expectations, how to manage being hot (or not) at 50, and when nice is not so nice.

   You can also google the Amherst Bulletin on these topics.

   and I highly suggest tango or other partner dancing to both sexes to develop better skills, awareness, and to maintain youthfulness.

6. downtowngal Oct 8th 2007 at 05:58 pm 6

   You have to consider the big picture that you’re not going to click with every guy. I wonder how Joan has been going about meeting men other than online, and if this is her first foray into the dating world after being married.

   Also, what kinds of track records do these men have? I’ve found a huge difference when dating men who are beyond a certain age and have been married or in LTR’s vs. those who have not - a certain maturity and realistic expectations when it comes to relationships.

   If a guy can’t handle dating an emotionally balanced woman you wouldn’t want to be with someone like that anyway. It can seem daunting if you keep meeting these types of men but I believe there are good guys out there, just need to change your ways of meeting them beyong bars, online, etc.

   And Evan, I don’t believe that women over 35 have their options limited - I know of many women into their 40’s who’ve ended up finding someone AND having children. I’m sure that some women have issues preventing them from having fulfilling relationships but I think that men who reject women because of their age generally don’t do so because they want children (as they claim), they’re really afraid of commitment and ‘being rushed’. I know of some of these men and they’re into their late 40’s and STILL single, still looking for that perfect woman who doesn’t exist, meanwhile dating psycho-chicks.

7. verbosity Oct 9th 2007 at 11:37 am 7

   Wow, where to start? I must first comment that I have heard the term ‘emotionally available’ (or unavailable) regarding men defined at least a dozen different ways by a like number of people of both sexes. It is an amorphous phrase with no specific meaning. I therefore do not know what Joan writes about.

   Since most of the posts are from women, I’ll state things from my oh so humber male perspective. I write not to cast stones at the fairer sex, but to balance the viewpoints a bit.

   One must realize that in the age brackets we discuss here (40+) most of the men (and women) have been through at least one divorce, long-term relationship, or other similar trauma. Of the divorces (btw, the divorce rate in Scottsdale, where I am, is approximately 70%), 70% of them are initiated by the women (can be independently verified). I am going to assume for sake of argument that the numbers are similar for non-marriage relationships also. What I’m getting at is that, in all likelihood (70%), a man had his marriage or most significant relationship ended by a woman. I’m not getting into questions of blame - that’s another discussion. Simply, she initiated the breakup.

   So, men in the 40+ age range are more likely to be cautious in committing their hearts, minds, and assets to a realtionship.

   I could not disagree with Suze more. She wrote “I think it is quite valid to point out that older women who have developed higher standards should put a plug on their nagging harpie tendencies–if indeed that is truly how they are coming across.” Developed higher standards? Is she so much better? Sorry to say, but these superioroty assumptions and entitlement mentality are why so many older men are reluctant to jump into relationships. No man should deal with any nagging harpie. The ‘nagging harpie’ usually surfaces after marriage and the legal commitment exists. But I digress….

   Suze further wrote, “Here is the sad truth: more women, across the board, at all ages, are opting to be single because they do not like the quality of men out there.” See my comment on divorce, above. Women are opting to be single, particularly in the 40+ range after divorcing. They are ‘opting’ to discard the life they initially chose like an outdated outfit, particularly the men they initially chose.

   It’s interesting. Suze thinks that men need to change further to suit women, it appears. My personal belief is that men should, for the most part, ignore chasing women. Instead, they should focus on their careers, friends and community. Women will seek them out.

   Alison also writes thoughtfully on the subject of family pressures, children and the like. I would like to note that she also shares the same wrongheaded assumptions Suze possesses when she wrote, “Suze is right- many women choose to divorce and stay single because many men ARE so difficult and inflexible, and not fun or easy-going (remember Girls just want to have fun too).” Huh? Difficult and inflexible? I don’t want to parse words, but my general observation is that men in general do not change their personality over time. Perhaps she thinks she should change for her - a wrong belief….

   Here is man’s perspective. Men like younger women. They are usually more fun, usually physically more attractive, less likely to have shrew-like harpie tendencies. After the aforementioned divorce or ended long term relationship, most men I have talked to just want something simple and to have fun. They often see their 20’s and 30’s as a waste of their youth and fun time due to their previously mentioned divorce, LTR. Now in their 40’s they prefer younger, simpler women.

   However, Alison alludes to something powerful - “They may find simple in a younger woman (at first) but as she matures, or feels sercurer in a relationship, she may start making more ‘demands’ and set more limits too.” Why demand? What limits? Most men have experienced this, particularly ones who were married. What I’ve founds is that as soon as there is some tpye of significant entalglement (living together, joint bank account, marriage, etc…) women get more ’secure’ and start making more demands, since for the man, extricating himself from the relationship is now messy, expensive, and difficult.

   The above paragraph brings me to another point - ladies would be well-served to quit worrying about a man’s income, and assets so much. This is its own separate subject, but every time I or my friends meet a woman, the inquiry is always about my occupation and neighborhood, indirectly inquiring about my income. This is treated on other parts of this site, but it should be mentioned here. I bring this up to make the point that men have no qualms going for younger women, since all women, younger and older, look at him and his wallet. This is a generalization, but an accurate one.

   Also, this is very non-PC, but so what? Men can afford to go after younger women also. Not monetarily speaking, but in this way - Men, as we age, generally get more distinguished and attractive (presuming we don’t go completely to pot) to a wider range of women older & younger. Our options increase. Women simply do not. Their options therefore reduce as men’s options increase.

   Additionally, regarding men’s preferences - Men without children almost always do not want to date women with children. I will state this simply (and do to women I meet) - I do not want my dating and social life to revolve around someone else’s children and their soccer games, practices, after school activities and the like. I chose not to have children, value my freedom, and act accordingly.

   One man’s perspective….

8. Hadley Paige Oct 9th 2007 at 12:40 pm 8

   I am reminded of the quote “Men marry women and hope they don’t change. Women marry men and hope they do”.

9. just my thoughts... Oct 9th 2007 at 02:10 pm 9

   Verbosity, “emotionally unavailable” generally means not able to commit emotionally to a relationship, whether someone wants to or not.

   Just because most relationships/marriages are ended by women (according to the stats you cite) doesn’t mean that the relationship was a good one. Some women end relationships because men are not willing or able to take it to the next level - i.e. dating exclusively or marriage. Other times it’s because the marriages weren’t good ones and despite all the counselling it’s not working, often times it’s the man who’s unwilling to change enough to focus on his relationship with his wife.

   If a guy wants to be with a ‘younger simpler’ (naive?) woman to try to relive his 30’s that he lost being married, that’s not the guy who’s looking for a serious mature relationship IMHO.

   There are a number of men who haven’t even been married and haven’t a clue how to treat a woman respectfully. I think these are the guys Joan is referring to.

10. downtowngal Oct 14th 2007 at 01:07 pm 10

    Verbosity, the kind of guy you describe sounds like someone who doesn’t want the emotional responsibility of being in a serious relationship.

    True, you can’t change someone’s values or personality quirks. But that’s different than being willing to compromise on certain things, like $$, household chores, etc. If you think that’s what makes someone ‘demanding’ or nagging then there’s a bigger issue here.

11. verbosity Oct 15th 2007 at 10:17 am 11

    downtowgal, I don’t wish to write a lengthy response. However, I am afraid the context in which I describe the kind of guy appears to be missing from your comment. The salient point I made was that a man, 40-ish, is exactly less likely to jump into a serious relationship. This is so due to some of the factors I stated (see above). Generally, one is reluctant to place their hand on a stove once it has already been burned.

    I do not mean this to sound flippant, but I have no idea what that phrase “emotional responsibility” means. It helps to know what that phrase truly means, particularly when used as an ad hominem attack instead of facts, as it is used here.

    Regarding money, demands and compromises…my opinion is that men should never, ever commingle money (or loan, or borrow from, etc) with a woman. Why would a woman care how much a man made unless she thought she would benefit from it in some way? By not commingling money (even if married), a potential area of conflict is solved. Further, since women can do the same jobs and earn the same (actually more than) as men for the same work, they should not care one bit what a man makes.

    What I think I’m trying to convey regarding the ‘demanding’ issues specifically, is a ceaselesss focus on the faults of guys. We’re not talking about forgetting to take the trash out occasionally. We’re talking about actually telling him on occasion the good things he is/does. Too often it appears the woman’s compromise (in her eyes at least) is even being with the guy at all. Not a good relationship point of view…

12. Suze Oct 16th 2007 at 04:18 pm 12

    Verbosity–I don’t know what era you are from but women are less likely to get into relationships these days. It’s at a 50% level and it’s by choice. Wake up.

    Men don’t have leverage on this. You don’t seem to get it.

    I think women’s lib turned men into a bunch of angry squalling infants.

    I partly blame the whole feminist shift for that…but the end result is that most single men are emotionally crippled and well…not appealing.

    I’ve always been this kinda bitchy though…so I won’t pin it on age. I am just super fussy and when I meet the right guy, that’s that.

    And quite frankly, the normal healthy guys are generally married (and stay married) by age 35. So you’ve got some mighty slim pickings.

    All that means is that it’s going to take longer–and requires patience

    So ladies, be patient, and know that a good thing is worth holding for.

    Women in their 40s are probably better off with men in their 50s and up. Just make them work hard for your love. That’s all.

13. Suze Oct 16th 2007 at 04:26 pm 13

    By the way, you really have to wonder about a guy who comes onto a woman’s dating advice board and starts harping and nagging and getting all hostile and defensive.

    Kinda makes my point, doesn’t it?

14. verbosity Oct 17th 2007 at 09:45 am 14

    Suze, just to be clear–this is a blog run by a man who gives dating advice to both sexes. Before you engage in an ad hominem attack not on the subject matter, you should first be correct on the basis for your attack (not a women’s dating board only).

    Further, Rather than have a rational discussion and a logical disagreement regarding the posted subject with some basis in fact, none was unfortunately posted. I have no idea what you mean by “It’s at a 50% level and it’s by choice.” What exactly is at a 50% level. Divorces? Or the gender initiating divorces? Or something else?

    Actually, sorry to rain on your diatribe with some fact, but the divorce rate in AZ is 65% for 2005 (see cdc.gov). CA, the 800 pound gorilla in terms of population (and who do not report divorce stats to Census), is very high:

    Year, CA Div.,L.A. Div.,CA Mar.,Divorce %
    1996 169,416 38,026 219,039 77.35%
    1997 165,547 37,501 237,669 69.65%
    1998 161,905 35,706 194,108 83.41%
    2000 156,078 36,551 196,896 79.27%
    2001 154,672 38,850 224,241 68.98%
    2002 160,854 40,468 217,880 73.83%
    2003 148,511 38,811 194,914 76.19%

    Average Divorce Rate: 75.54%** (Reference: Court Statistics Reports for 1996-2004.)

    To be fair, many other states are below 50%….TX, for example, has gone from 47% in ‘03 to 43% in ‘05. based upon this information, it think it fair to assume the overall divorce rate exceeds 50%, eepecially when the rate of 2nd & 3rd marriages far exceeds 50%.

    Of this over 50% divorce rate, women do initiate approximately 70% of all divorces. See Discovery Health, AARP. The whys are irrelevant for this point at least.

    The point, you ask? Simple. Many older men, likely having gone through a divorce (and by proxy, a split of a long term relationship) they likly did not initiate, are understandably reluctant to get into another relationship. To ignore this reality is foolish.

    I do not understand what Suze menas by “Men don’t have leverage on this.” What is ‘this?’ Many men do not understand they have absolute leverage, particularly as they get a bit older and more established. See above for further explanation, which also refutes Suze’s comment of “Women in their 40s are probably better off with men in their 50s and up.”

    There is no merit in addressing or even characterizing The rest of Suze’s comments. They unfortunately speak volumes by themselves…

15. Melina Oct 24th 2007 at 06:55 am 15

    I don’t mean do add fuel to all that’s been said…but as a lawyer I can tell you: Anyone can pull up statistic with internet and conjure up some very “scientific conclusion (but totally teinted on the person owns perspective on the subject)”. Like the saying goes..” 99.6% of people knows that”. (joke)

    So really…using divorce statistic rate to make a point about man “absolute leverage” as so nicely said by Verbosity, it’s not only biased on perhaps his own perspective/or views on the “bad women who actually leaves mans - either divorce or end of LTR” but also look down on women who are in their 40’s because clearly…as said before :”Men, as we age, generally get more distinguished and attractive (presuming we don’t go completely to pot) to a wider range of women older & younger. Our options increase. Women simply do not. Their options therefore reduce as men’s options increase.”. This is not only a presumption and very condescending but also it created a double standard about women’s worth in the dating game. It’s my opinion that this is not a fact…but clearly again, like Evan nicely said, ” a type of false thinking that doesn’t lead to anything positive.”

    I personally believe that womens over 40’s are of equal worth against man in the dating game. We as womens do get more distinguished, confident and also more wise about what’s really important as we aged.

    Maybe mens want “simple”…Sadly, I agree on that. But I’m kind slightly disappointed in womans older then myself…Women wiser and into their 40’s….I mean as a women over 40’s you have to think about this for second. At this stage, you have probably raised children successfully, they’re grown and have their own life, you might have been through divorce or a failed relationship (who dumped who here or statistic is so not relevant ), you been around the “stage” of dating long enough to know a few hidden tricks going on behind the curtains and you also have on the other hand, possibly LTR or a marriage during a number of year and also lead /or still lead a very stimulating career. I’m not trying to play the feminist card or anything like that. But my question is :With clearly the value of life’s experiences that womens over 40’s possess why not wonder : why are some mens over 40 singles? It’s just a thought…There might be something there!

    Ok,the mens over 40 or even men under that age group in fact, may want “simple”, “easy come and easy go” type of attitude or “fun “…The truth as i see it, It’s true!! Fun, simple and quietly breezy is great!!! But clearly not in the long run. Let’s face it and be honest about this, life doesn’t cut it for “simple” and “take it easy” attitude always. I think that It might be quite a change from life’s demanding nature to have “simple” for a while, but “simple” just don’t last in the long run. I might also add and it’s only my legal point of view but…some marriage might have failed because after a few years and a lot of unresolved issues on both parts…”simple” is the way to do things, nothing gets solved and things then fall apart. We tend to put things underneath the surface just to keep the peace or the harmony in the relationship. What happens to “commitment” ?? (see “commitment” : when you are willing to give your time and energy to something that you believe in, or a promise or firm decision to do something (Cambridge dict.))

    My point is exactly this : as we get older we want someone to be there for all of it not just the “simple stuff” but even the heavier-unexpected-stuff that are bounds to come down the road. “Simple” doesn’t really last, “simple” is gone out the door the minute a bump in the road comes along. That’s telling it like it is. Womens shouldn’t put their judgment aside and try to be “all is breezy” and “let’s not think to much it might scare the poor fella away”. They should in the beginning of a relationship be able to let loose and enjoy the moment, be able to “take it easy”, it’s nice for a while. But I personally think that a really “distinguished man” who have any life’s experiences and some backbone will no doubts embrace and appreciate a women who can be “the deep and wiser” women that the women over 40 is, and put the breezy “fun and simple” on the side.

    I also have to say to men…Simple is fun for anyone, under or over 40, sure “simple” makes very good dating in the short term but it’s not what makes it in the long term. The problem might be that, as we do with other subjects…we don’t wanna see the tough truth behind things, it’s either better to blame the person in front of us or simpler to be in denial…

    Also, I might be overly idealistic about it or us as womens..but ladies I can only say this : you should believe in things that “empower” the essence of who you are as a women and as a person. Not the “simple” version of it that leaves us with a sense limitation about our worth.

    I might be younger, i might even be able to still act the “simple carefree naive way” from times to times that mens seem so fonds of…but I already know from life experiences that “simple” doesn’t make it in the end. I believe that for a true LTR, strong, authentic, distinguished mens with character go for womens who possess the qualities they possess themselves. A strong, authentic and distinguished women with character who surely can “take it easy” and be up for some “smooth sailing without excess complications”….but not for a women who define herself or let mens define her as “simple”.

    P.s. I also need to add that i think that it’s for the same reason younger man are now considering dating womens older than them or in their 40’s …simply because womens in their 40’s know what they want, they have character and depth…because that’s so much more than “simple”. It’s way better;)

    As a younger women, I would really appreciate comments from womens older than I am about my opinion stated in my post. Thanks you in advance.

    Nota bene…I know there is more than one error in grammar, verbs, etc…Just be nice and understanding please Thanks!

16. Patti Nov 10th 2007 at 04:36 am 16

    I for one am sick of all the “self-help” people telling women they have to change to please men. Why? Why do we have to put up with dishonesty, not calling, game playing and cheating and then be “fun and easy going” (i.e., ignore/forgive their bad behavior.). Smart women have trouble dating because we see through - and won’t put up with - a man’s lies and bad behavior. We call them on it and it makes men uncomfortable when they get caught in their lies. Also, being smart women ourselves, we’re not that enamoured or impressed with their accomplishments because we’re equally accomplished. When you think about it, with the creation of sperm in the laboratories, test tube babies and electric jar openers - men will be obsolete in a few years anyway - just keep them around for the sex (well, we don’t really need them for that either……) and go out with your fabulous girlfriends!

17. mev Nov 11th 2007 at 09:27 pm 17

    Patti you are right on the money. Believe me, I understand the differences in the sexes- men are visual, driven by their animalistic urges and trillions of sperm, yada, yada, yada. Hey, as a very well-educated woman who is 41 and mighty proud of it, and extensively well-read I too can come up with any statistic, fact, anecdote, etc to challenge someone such as Verbosity (I know it scares ya, hon). And, according to all the self-help gurus a true man desires a woman with confidence, intelligence, money of her own and experience. And, again these same gurus (such as Evan-sorry bud) state that you must trust your instincts, not be a doormat, not to settle for less than your worth; yet, by the same token this same woman should discard all that advice if she is over 40 because she is too thoughtful, not light (uh, do you mean I have a brain) and unwilling to compromise on her core values. Maybe, it’s because she does not have to because she has the wherewithall, knowledge, self-acceptance and insight not to accept anything less than what she feels she deserves. Isn’t this what the dating gurus “harp” to us single women? So the question remains if this is what a true man needs then why would he want someone “simple”? Are men really this base? Are they so low on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs??? And, why is no one mentioning that contrary to Verbosity’s viewpoint, many men over 40 do NOT look more “distinguished.” Unless he’s Sean Connery. In fact, the most classy, elegant women I know are over 40 and look unbelievable. And, thank goodness there are images today of women over 40 who are absolutely beautiful-and here’s the kicker-inside and out. Think Halle Berry, Nicole Kidman, Teri Hatcher and the list goes on. Nothing can substitute for experience, knowledge and a life well lived. I sincerely believe that simple, free and easy are being euphemistically substituted for naive, stupid and passive. And, to which, I am positive no honest good man would desire in his life.

18. Sindee Dec 13th 2007 at 03:24 pm 18

    Whew…..

    Well Melina, why not pull the feminist card.

    As a 40 something year old woman, raised in an era of equal opportunity and strong women as a role model, I have supported two husbands at the sucessful peak of their careers only to be divorced and replaced with younger women so the men could shoulder the glory as their own. Both - now addicts of one sort or another and less successful.

    Still, I maintained hope and belief in my intellect, well kept my body, and hoped to share a good life with a good man.

    I have concluded, that the opinionated data found on the internet and consumer psychology supports the “BackLash Theory” . The one thing which was overlooked by the men behind the theory is the backlash on the backlash.

    Now, women have harnessed their sexual power and demand careers - as the corporate ladder is replaced by golden poles at gentlemen clubs - $4,000 a week can be garnished from their new found power.

    Young girls go out with old guys because they buy “bling bling”, or clothing, etc. Cheaper than the marriage contract of splitting your pension 50/50 - sooner or later - the women will wise up and start to teach their offspring.

    I have my own personal spin on this. To those older women out there who understand the old double standard game. Recognize the bottom line is this. You can hook up for a one night stand and get sex. Look on Craigslist. You can also spend lot of money (did you know that on average a woman spends $65,000 coloring her hair over her lifetime?) trying to stay young and beautiful. But - as you trade in the tight abs for a steel mind - you recognize the joke has been played on you.

    My real bottom line is this. For what? A bunch of fat old men who are basically pedaphiles? Who wish to bolster their flaccid egos with imagery and spend hard earned moments for a 5 minute finale?

    I have lost respect for the majority of men out there. Fortunately for me, this frees a great deal of my time and energy for myself. I can’t really see spending time finding “one of the few good guys left”. I also know, if I want a hot sexual tryst - I can find it. In fact, the sex trade industry flaunts the new fad in Kenya - hot young studs for older women. Frankly, I don’t think that two wrongs make a right. The backlash on the backlash is that sex has been irretrievably damaged an taken out of the equation of love. Women are deemed assets with short term shelve lives. Youth has a high trading value. As a society we have become whorish.

    Shallow men are a turn-off. So - I’m judgmental. Old Fat Men chasing young girls are juvenille. Men in big cars imply big disappointment.

    I spoke today to a 48 year old who was telling me about his disappointment in a 28 year old he was dating. He ended it when she demanded his credit card and joint signatures. LOL -

    Bottom line. Take a long hard look at what’s paid off. Intelligent Women in their 40’s see the light. Men can’t get over on them.

    All of the subliminal and overt manipulation of consumer advertisements (propaganda) has screwed up a very basic element of life that makes it healthy and loving for both men and women.

    Too bad for all the old fat loser men who are chasing young girls. You are too foolish to see your game of power has you defined as loser - right along with the older women you seek to disempower.

    This gal has found new joys and if I want hot sex - I know where to find it. So old guys - keep your power & hope your pretty little theives will take care of you when you are old and grey.

    Maybe that is the femist card. If so - proud to carry it.

19. hunter Dec 13th 2007 at 06:01 pm 19

    …ladies….I am sorry men have’nt turned out to be what you expected……..

20. verbosity Dec 14th 2007 at 11:06 am 20

    Reading reading the above comments certainly fascinates. Evan’s right in that both sexes are to blame. Rationalizing the superiority of your position and/or refusing to see another’s point of view is precisely heart of Evan’s point. That said, I feel I must share some observations.

    Melina, in everyday life, people use statistics and measures in order to make decisions. No one claims the conclusions are ’scientific.’ However the issue is whether the conclusions are reasonable based upon the available information. You offer no contradictory information to challenge the reasonableness of the assertion (that men are cautious about entering into a serious relationship after divorce or LTR), just an ad hominem attack on me with no basis in fact. I provided the statistical cites. As an attorney, you should know this is not persuasive argument to a court.

    What I find amusing and disheartening about Melina’s post (and similar ones), is a complete disregard for my point that “many older men, likely having gone through a divorce (and by proxy, a split of a long term relationship) they likly did not initiate, are understandably reluctant to get into another relationship.” Is it really so hard to understand or more importantly, to feel empathy for this point? I would submit such understanding is vital to communication, and therefore, vital to a successful, mature relationship. The absence of such understanding in these posts is telling.

    What I also find fascinating is that several posters seem to think that Evan is lying when he says they want ’simple.’ He wrote an intelligent explanation regarding what he meant by it, specifically taking care to mean it did not include ‘brainless chimps.’ I would submit that ignoring this point does nothing further to enhance understanding between the sexes, and is quite disrespectful.

    Also, my impression of the ad hominem personal attacks on me for stating an admittedly politically incorrect perspective (based in fact) is that there are an awful lot of angry women out there, for there is no reason to personally attack someone for stating a contrary opinion. I can only guess that those posters who have engaged in such ad hominem attacks are angry I have contradicted or indirectly challenged their paradigm of the male-female interaction. I would further submit that expending such anger in hardening one’s defenses proves counter-productive to establishing healthy relationships with the opposite sex.

    Hunter said it so well above….

21. Lyall Taylor Dec 15th 2007 at 04:42 pm 21

    Suzi, nobody is trying to say that men are perfect, or lay all the blame squarely on women’s shoulders. But men are tired of being told that things are always their fault, and rightly or wrongly, for any women trying to improve their relationship status or find that someone special, that attitiude will be of absolutely no help.

    You say the following:

    “Have you noticed in this exchange that women’s behavior/demeanor etc is being put to blame here, and men are being let off scott free?

    The underlying message in the commentary here is that women are the ones who need to change their flawed behavior.

    Here is the sad truth: more women, across the board, at all ages, are opting to be single because they do not like the quality of men out there.

    the numbers are going to continue to grow until men elect to examine their own behavior and not put the responsibility of change squarely on women.”

    All this presumes that women are faultless and men are the ones who need to change - you are basically doing exactly what you accuse men of doing in this discussion. THis attitude is exactly why MEN are also choosing not to enter into relationships, and also have extreme difficulty finding the types of women they are looking for.

    We simply do not like being with women who always presume we are at fault and we need to change. The presumption is always that men need to change to accommodate a women’s relationship needs and a man’s needs are almost always considered largely irrelevant (even if only unconsciously). Mens needs, desires, aspirations etc are so unappreciated that often women do not even realise that they exist independently of her needs.

    The reality of the situation is very simple. Men simply want women who are physically attractive and sensual, who like them for who they, are who aren’t always complaining/trying to change them. That’s all. Hadley Page has even noted that the phyically attractive bit takes backseat to being fun/easy going.

    And the reality is that those traits ARE difficult to find. And it is constructive advice to women that if you are that way, you will increase your relationship success. Assuming that women are already perfect and don’t need to change will not increase relationship success.

22. Lyall Taylor Dec 15th 2007 at 04:56 pm 22

    Patti - you say the following:

    “I for one am sick of all the “self-help” people telling women they have to change to please men. Why? Why do we have to put up with dishonesty, not calling, game playing and cheating and then be “fun and easy going” (i.e., ignore/forgive their bad behavior.). Smart women have trouble dating because we see through - and won’t put up with - a man’s lies and bad behavior. We call them on it and it makes men uncomfortable when they get caught in their lies. Also, being smart women ourselves, we’re not that enamoured or impressed with their accomplishments because we’re equally accomplished. When you think about it, with the creation of sperm in the laboratories, test tube babies and electric jar openers - men will be obsolete in a few years anyway - just keep them around for the sex (well, we don’t really need them for that either……) and go out with your fabulous girlfriends!”

    Lets just think about this a little bit. Women can also be dishonest. Women also often don’t call. Women most definitely also play games. And women also cheat.

    Yet it is only men who are to blame and women shouldn’t have to ‘put up with mens bad behaviour’. Are women ever accountable when they behave in a similar way?

    And to say men are essentially obsolete - this is an incredibly offensive statement to make. It’s worse than a man saying “we only need women for sex, and now that we have prostitutes and pornography, women for relationships is essentially a waste of time”. Can you imagine the wrath a comment like that would attract.

    It is these attitudes that men find so unattractive. We are tired of always being wrong. If a man cheats, he is a dog. If a women cheats, he must not have been attending to her needs. Do you not think that a man cheating might also have had something to do with whether the women was being attentive to his needs?

    If a man asks a women to change at all, then he is being selfish and putting all the blame squarely on women. If women criticise men’s behaviour, and he doesn’t change, then men are being insensitive and selfish and women will “choose not to get into relationships until men clean up there act”.

    I really find all this quite upsetting and I think I can speak for many men in saying that we can’t understand what we ever did to deserve to be treated this way.

23. Hadley Paige Dec 18th 2007 at 02:08 pm 23

    Patti wrote “… being smart women ourselves, we’re not that enamoured or impressed with their [men] accomplishments because we’re equally accomplished.”

    Patti’s world view is representative of why I ( and many other men) feel that “successful ” women are not good material for successful marriages. Yes, they are fun to date & bed and are “fabulous”. But they are not that impressed with us (so it is likely that a marriage won’t work out). Since many men feel that marriage is a crap shoot they can’t win if divorce occurs we tend to take women who, among other important traits, ARE “enamoured or impressed” with our accomplishments.

24. m Dec 19th 2007 at 01:41 pm 24

    “But they are not that impressed with us (so it is likely that a marriage won’t work out). Since many men feel that marriage is a crap shoot they can’t win if divorce occurs we tend to take women who, among other important traits, ARE “enamoured or impressed” with our accomplishments.”

    Men crack me up sometimes.

    What if your “accomplishments” just AREN’T THAT IMPRESSIVE?

    That just seems to occur to so few of you. Like Lake Wobegon, where “all the men are above average”.

    Sheesh.

25. hunter Dec 19th 2007 at 05:08 pm 25

    …..a shortage of men? Physically speaking, a shortage of men?……..I have heard that saying the entire half a century that I have been on this planet………who knows, maybe, it will happen….

26. verbosity Dec 20th 2007 at 02:53 pm 26

    I just love reading M’s post. It is completely devoid of rational, logical, respectful discussion. It seeks only to insult men in general, and contributes nothing to the discussion. In fact, it seems to reinforce the logical, rational, thoughtful points made in this thread.

    And to add something to Lyall Taylor’s posts, I would respectfully disagree with him. Men do need to change. Men do need to realize, truly realize, that they are in the driver’s seat regarding the opposite sex. They should focus on their careers, health (physical AND mental), family and friends. Women will therefore seek them out, like the original poster.

27. Hadley Paige Dec 28th 2007 at 02:15 pm 27

    In response to the observation that perhaps men seek out women for LTRs that are impressed with their accomplishments, M writes: “Men crack me up sometimes. What if your “accomplishments” just AREN’T THAT IMPRESSIVE?”

    For you M, perhaps most mens accomplishments are not that impressive. Consequently you have a challenge before you relationshipwise. But regardless of how unimpressive you find any particular male, there is a pool of women who will likely be content with that level of accomplishment. Hence back to the original point that “successful” women have a challenge meeting suitable (does that really mean impressive???) men.

28. hunter Dec 29th 2007 at 06:34 pm 28

    yes, to lyall taylor,….in case you haven’t heard,… men do have to admit they are wrong,….. if they want to get laid….it comes down to this, do we want to get laid, or do we want to be right?….

29. verbosity Dec 30th 2007 at 08:43 am 29

    Haha, hunter. You are unfortunately correct for the vast majority of situations.

    I still keep coming back to the concept that men in general (women also), should spend more time on themselves pursuing career success (whatever that means to your chosen career), physical and MENTAL health, and a family/friend life balance. In short, they should seek to be balanced, happy people. Members of the opposite sex will therefore seek them out as standouts from the rest of available options.

    Just chasing tail only seems a recipe for disaster.

30. hunter Dec 30th 2007 at 03:12 pm 30

    to Verbosity,

    …a recipe for disaster.” I agree with that,yet, many single men are “clueless.” I am not for constant chasing, but, I am all for raising the level of conscience awareness…making men(and some women) aware of the “dating code.”

31. Sam Dec 30th 2007 at 04:57 pm 31

    “Men do need to change. Men do need to realize, truly realize, that they are in the driver’s seat regarding the opposite sex. They should focus on their careers, health (physical AND mental), family and friends. Women will therefore seek them out, like the original poster.”

    Come on, there’s so much overlap. A good looking woman is going to have more options than an ordinary looking guy. A woman with a good career is going to have more options than a guy with an unimpressive one. Etc etc.

    Women in their 20s have more options than men in their 20s. As we age a male advantage develops, but IMO, there’s parity while we’re in our thirties.

32. verbosity Jan 2nd 2008 at 12:55 pm 32

    Hunter, I agree completely.

    I do not understand Sam’s post. He/She (Samantha?) wrote, “Come on, there’s so much overlap. A good looking woman is going to have more options than an ordinary looking guy. A woman with a good career is going to have more options than a guy with an unimpressive one. Etc etc. Women in their 20s have more options than men in their 20s. As we age a male advantage develops, but IMO, there’s parity while we’re in our thirties.”

    There is nothing inconsistent with what I wrote. Sam’s comments are loaded and general and some are the subject of other threads. I will address a few of the general points he made. Let me first say that there is an underlying assumption to my comments - that men desire a good, healthy (physically and mentally) match for them for the long term, not just some hot piece of tail. That said, women in their 20’s likely do have more dating options than men in their 20’s, generally speaking (particularly if they are good-looking). My belief is that women in general are more likely to choose men who make and/or have significantly more money. So women in their 20’s have the option of men in their 20’s, 30’s 40’s & up.

    Money is not the only reason for these additional options in their 20’s. Further, I would submit that truly healthy women in their 20’s are not placing inordinate importance on money. Money and dating are the subject of other threads on this site and explore it more fully.

    It’s true that good looking women have more options ordinary looking guys. No kidding. That’s comparing apples and oranges. Women, good-looking and ordinary-looking, have more options for dating.

    We can look at the flip side of all of Sam’s assertions (women with better careers have more options than men with unimpressive careers) (as opposed to men with great careers and women who do not have good ones), but the point of my post is that men should focus on their own lives to become good, successful, healthy and balanced. They will not only attract more women that way, but they will attract more women better suited to them that way. I submit they will also be far better suited to choose a good, healthy match for themselves. I think this rings true through all age ranges.

33. Sam Jan 7th 2008 at 08:33 am 33

    Verbosity,

    Thanks for commenting. I was merely qualifying what you said about men being in the driver’s seat. I think that how in control of a relationship you are depends on what your other options are, and how many options you have depends on your looks, brains, career, and age. If you have other options you don’t need to chase someone who isn’t that into you.

    There probably are more instances (like 40+ dating) where the man has more options, but there are almost as many where the woman has more. I certainly don’t feel advantaged in my relationships at all. Most of the time I’m the one doing the chasing.

34. verbosity Jan 7th 2008 at 02:13 pm 34

    Sam,

    Thank you for clarifying where you are coming from. I think we see each other’s point. Based upon your comments, I guess you to be in your mid to late 20’s (please don’t confirm or deny if you wish). I think you are correct that women in their 20’s have more options….Being in my mid-30’s, I have dated women ages 23-42 in the last 12 months. The point being that the women in their 20’s have more options of guys in their 20’s - 40’s (usually).

    One cannot ignore this reality. However, my point is this…have you ever noticed you find it easier to meet and attract women when you don’t think about it? Like when you spend more time and energy at work or other hobbies and not just work and seek women? I submit it is at these times, where you lead a more balanced life, that you maximize your options. What I guess you desire is that you wish to maximize your options to women in their 20’s. However, beyond that, I suspect you’d like to maximize your options to GOOD (for you) women in this age bracket. Of course you have to do some chasing… after all, men almost always have to initiate action (women’s lib be damned!).

    But realize that life and dating is a race. It isn’t a 100 meter sprint. It’s a marathon. You may not feel advantaged in your relationships now, but as you spend more time on work, friends, hobbies, etc. (ie. - yourself). I submit the more comfortable you are with these major aspects of your life, you will feel more advantaged and in control of your relationships. I’ve found it helps to be more at peace with myself before being with another.

    I hope this post doesn’t condescend. I simply desire to make sure my communication is clear.

35. hunter Jan 7th 2008 at 05:56 pm 35

    …somehow I think relationships are more about information/being consciously aware of what you are doing….

36. Paul Jan 8th 2008 at 01:19 pm 36

    We need our women back…
    I just got done reading every post on here. I found that the women seem to be very angry and really could not come back with much that made sense at all. If you look into the faces of all the women driving home from work, at, lets say arund 6:00 at night, what you’ll see is a deep sadness. It’s not what they truely want or are made for. If you look back in the last 50-60 years and ask yourself who has changed the most, it would have to be women due to the womens movement and womens liberation. I don’t think there can be much argument there. It has had unplanned consequesces and devastating effects to our society, as evidenced by the lady commenters on this thread, kids not coming home to a mother in the house, etc. Do you think it is an accident that the divorce rate, which held for decades at about 20 %, skyrocketed to almost 75% during the same period? So who probably needs to change the most? Hmmm…women maybe? I can’t imagine going out with some of the women who attacked the men posters here…yek! No leverage? What a joke…we have all the leverage we want. These women are exactly the cause of the problem in my opinion (and that is all this is btw…my opinion…you DO NOT have to agree with it). Guys after all, are really pretty simple and easy to please. We don’t want much, but ladies, harmony in the household is something we do need. Verbosity is correct. Your opinions? Sure, we’ll listen, and need them, but guess what…father does know best usually. Your independance? Where does it say that women are supposed to be independant? It is just the other way around actually…we are all supposed to be interdependant and we’re made for relationship. Men have been imbued with the leadership responsibilities in this world. That is as it should be. Women just don’t seem to want to admit that as a woman ages, lots of them tend to get more grumpy, temperamental, judgemental and just plain sour. Who wants that? We have gotten so far away from the biblical model for husbands and wives (on both sides to be fair), as politically incorrect as it is, but it must be remembered that women were made FROM the man, and made FOR the man to be his helpmate…it is not the other way around. Just to be clear on that…we lead, you follow. You want your man to be more responsible, then help him to be that way. Yopu want him to be a better leader? Then help him to be that way. The fact is, we need you, can’t get along without you, don’t want to. But we need you back the way you were meant to be…not the way you are now. Sure there will be women who point out that there have been men that have abused our God given authority, and there have been, no doubt. But I think a lot of that is simply our tendancy to jump to the opposite conclusion. There have been many, many more that haven’t. On the other side of the coin, I think we need more men like Verbosity who are not afraid to make a point, however unpopular…I think we need more REAL men out there who show true gentle leadership, responsibility taking, control taking and who know how and when to take command of a situation in life. We are the ones who handle things - to protect and provide. If you want to say I must be living in another decade, that’s fine…those were much happier days back then frankly. Men were men and women were women. Now what we have is women becoming more like men, and men becoming more like women! When it says we are to treat women as to the weaker vessel, what it means is we are to treat women like a fine china cup. Men, we are to love our women, and women, you are to respect your men…and both are unconditional!
    Good reads are “Love and Respect” and “Wild at Heart”.
    Thanks,
    I hope I’ve ruffled some feathers.

37. Jamie Jan 8th 2008 at 02:46 pm 37

    Wow, Paul.

    I am a parent. I have a great job. I was ordained when I was 26 years old. I have my doctorate. I drive home with a smile on my face -but sometimes I work at home -still smiling. I earn much more than my spouse -we get along great! I know I am one of the most blessed people on the planet. I was on the phone today with TIAA-Cref updating my retirement profile -good things there. There are so many good, good things I wouldn’t trade for anything. I know I would not be where I am without Jesus on my side! I also am a woman. I’m glad you did not have a say in my life. I hope it continues to be the case.

    Best,
    Jamie

38. verbosity Jan 8th 2008 at 04:03 pm 38

    How many “I’s” did Jamie just use in personally bashing Paul? I respectfully submit that these posts remain about the subject matter at hand (Where Are Emot. Avail., Mentally Healthy Men), rather than personal insults levied against the posters.

    I happen to disagree with the thrust of Paul’s post. However, there is a way to disagree without being disagreeable while keeping to the subject matter at hand, not the person posting it.

39. Jamie Jan 9th 2008 at 06:03 am 39

    In response to the bash from verbosity… “I” was using a literary technique in illustrating a point in using myself as the example. A very common technique. Ok, maybe it would have been better had “I” been used once with a lot of commas….(???) -but “I” used in consecutive fashion is a way to… I’m not going to explain writing style.

    Anyway, “I” posted my POV as all of us -which is inherently personal. The entire notion of a post is personal -such as with your last post, verbosity. [Which I find joyfully hypocritical]. This isn’t BBC news or CNN. Thank you.

    I am supposing silence (even with the written word) is the better response here.

    Best to you,
    Jamie

40. verbosity Jan 9th 2008 at 11:32 am 40

    Jamie,

    Your supposition silence is better is incorrect, and I am joyfully not hypocritical. Your ‘literary technique’ had one end goal - to belittle Paul, verbal niceties aside. My little comment about the use of I’s was simply a literary device to draw attention to the fact you personally attacked Paul (”I’m glad you did not have a say in my life. I hope it continues to be the case.”). If you feel that way, fine. Send it to Paul directly, outside of this public forum. Most importantly, it did absolutely nothing to add to the thread’s subject matter.

    By all means, share your POV on the issue of emotionally available, mentally healthy men. However, i submit sending broadsides Paul’s way regarding your life is unrelated to the subject matter of emotionally available, mentally healthy men.

    Posts are personal and so are the opinions expressed in them. However, there is a difference between disagreeing with a person’s opinion and taking a verbal shot at them, not their opinion. I do not know if you can discern the difference.

    My basic point is you were blatantly disrespectful to Paul. Further, You mentioned that Jesus was on your side. I wonder what He would say about treating someone else in that manner, particularly when Paul said nothing provocative to you directly. Please do not throw the hypocrite label at me.

    Curiously CNN and BBC receive criticisms from many areas their news reporting is colored by their political opinions, but I digress..

41. verbosity Jan 9th 2008 at 01:05 pm 41

    In regards to Paul’s posting, I see his points. However, I respectfully disagree with him. We need our women back? Those horses left the corral.

    If I read his post correctly, he would like women to change to a more traditional, Bible-oriented approach to life. (Paul, feel free to correct this paraphrase). The problem with this approach is that it is near-impossible to change someone else’s behavior, particularly when that someone else has little to no incentive to change.

    So why bother worrying about what women do? Lyall Taylor had an interesting point - “And to say men are essentially obsolete - this is an incredibly offensive statement to make. It’s worse than a man saying “we only need women for sex, and now that we have prostitutes and pornography, women for relationships is essentially a waste of time”. Can you imagine the wrath a comment like that would attract.”

    I say don’t worry about what women do. You cannot change their behavior, only your own. Spend time on YOUR career, men, YOUR friends, YOUR hobbies/interests, YOUR physical and mental health. And, much like the cat who wants to be petted by the only person in the room ignoring it, they will come.

    If there is a common thread among many comments by ladies throughout this topic and the topics that deal with $ and dating/relationships, it is that they want men who are secure emotionally and monetarily. I submit that by focusing your energies as stated in the preceding paragraph, men not only become that, but they will also be in a position to better choose women that are emotionally healthy, not primarily focused on men’s earnings, non-harpies, etc., and attract more of them.

    I believe only in focusing on their own lives in this way can they realistically change these issues.

42. Julz Jan 9th 2008 at 06:14 pm 42

    In regards to Paul’s comment about guys being “easy to please” what a load of crap! Men want to have sex whenever they want and then they end up falling asleep afterwards because it’s not their fault. Poor boys! They want a girl they can show off to their mates to boost their own ego and self esteem. They want their meals cooked to their liking, things perfect at home without them lifting a finger to help. They want to be able to watch sports, hang out with the boys, drink beer, look at other women to see what’s out there. Ugly guys still want perfect girls but they have lost the mirror to check themselves out. Women will like a guy regardless of his looks if there is something to attract them but a guy is usually only attracted to a women’s looks and that’s why the attraction on his part fails. They don’t care what a woman says just what sexual favours she can perform in the bedroom and if she is hot enough to show his mates. That’s why so many great women are single.

43. hunter Jan 9th 2008 at 06:30 pm 43

    to julz,

    I agree with you, there should be more info written, for men, on “attraction”…

44. verbosity Jan 10th 2008 at 08:59 am 44

    Julz is soooooooooo right. That is the perfect description all men. They are 100% responsible.

    I usually refrain from sarcasm, but cannot help it…

45. Julz Jan 10th 2008 at 01:40 pm 45

    Verbosity, I am not saying men are 100% reponsible. I am being serious so I don’t appreciate the sarcasm towards my response. Men need to realise that their actions have consequences just like ours do. If your hearts not in it don’t lead a girl on to believe he wants the same thing. You try to talk about feelings but the guy closes up so you don’t really know where you stand. I chose to stay with a guy who in the end couldn’t commit to an adult relationship which involved meeting friends and family. I take responsibility for that. I don’t take back the rest of the stuff I said about what men want.

46. mrs. vee Jan 10th 2008 at 04:44 pm 46

    Paul said, “I found that the women seem to be very angry and really could not come back with much that made sense at all. If you look into the faces of all the women driving home from work, at, lets say arund 6:00 at night, what you’ll see is a deep sadness.”

    Paul, I am a working woman, successful, happily married. Mr. Vee and I equally respect and admire one another. I love my life.

    In your mind, is something wrong with this picture?

47. Paul Jan 11th 2008 at 07:02 am 47

    Mrs. Vee,
    Absolutly not. If you read proverbs 31, “The Wife of Noble Character”, God clearly says the wife works, or at least does something to bring in income. In a way, she too provides - “She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vinyard. She sets about her work vigorously, her arms are strong for the task. She see’s that her trading is profitable, and her lamp does not go out at night.” I don’t think though God had careers for women in mind when he wrote that. A womans husband and family should be her “career”. In proper alignment, the wife is under the husbands umbrella of protection. Just as it goes that first there is God, then Jesus is submissive to Him, the husband is submissive to Jesus. Then the wife is in submission to the husband…he has authority over her and in the house. He is the head of the household. That is the way God wants it to be…that is not my idea by any stretch of the imagination! “She watches over the affairs of her household.’ Her children arise and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her. Her husband has full confidence in her and lacks nothing of value. She brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life.” The income is just to suppliment the family.
    Much of what I say in my earlier post that has got so much attention is straight from the bible. Woman are made from man (ie. the rib) and for man (to be his “helpmate” - not slave!) because God knew it was not good for man to be alone and that we needed each other. It does not demean or belittle women in any way. In fact just the opposite. It holds them up. I love women and respect women. And I think it is great when a women comes out and says she and her husband admire each other.
    I run a relationship small group, all based on biblical principles. After two divorces, I said to myself this was not going to happen again, so I turned to the bible and several Christian relationship books to find out what does work in relationships. All I can tell you is if you guys could see a marriage work like God says it should, you’d be amazed how happy you can be. Ever since the womens movement, the roles that God set forth have been skewed. And that is not good and that is why there are so many problems in relationships these days.
    “A wife of noble character, who can find. She is worth far more than rubies.” A men.

48. verbosity Jan 11th 2008 at 09:24 am 48

    I don’t pretend to speak for Paul, but I think I can safely say that the main thrust of Paul’s comments, as quoted by Mrs Vee, is that many of the responses from women are angry, ad hominem attacks without much by way of refutation. I think he expressed a frustration I share - that Paul and other male posters have posted thoughtful responses from the male perspective why there are fewer emotionally available, mentally healthy men, and some in response to why many men date women younger than their contemporaries.

    However, instead of refuting Paul’s points (which I have done) or many other men’s posts (including mine re: reasons and context within which men make dating decisions), I must note that there have been little, if any refuting posts to many of the aforementioned men’s points. Lyall Taylor (post 22) wrote a great post that was thoughtful. I noted above that there has been little to refute these points and that ad hominem attacks on myself and other posters seem to be the main order of response from most women.

    As I wrote above, is it really so hard to understand or more importantly, to feel empathy for men’s points? I would submit such understanding is vital to communication, and therefore, vital to a successful, mature relationship. The absence of such understanding in these posts is telling, which is why I suggested additional things men can do (instead of hoping women change), above. Ignoring the valid points made, often with statistics and articles to support the points, attacking the messenger instead, is disrespectful.

    In regards to Julz’s comments and response, I was admittedly sarcastic. The reason I posted the sarcastic line was to point out that she painted ALL men with the same overly broad brush. Additionally, I would further note all she paints the same sexist, stereotypical of all men that does nothing to further better communication.

    Please bear in mind that any man san state, as Julz did, that all women are gold digging, attention whoring, shoe-addicted, Juicy Couture wearing, fake french manicure having, emotionally needy, too much makeup wearing, lazy slobs who want nothing more than to sit home on their backsides while their men pay for their shopping, lunches with girls, while they cackle about how much they spend, how little they do, and how much it’ll cost him to leave (assuming marriage). FYI - notice how I left sex out? See how that does nothing to further the discussion? One can refute what I just wrote in this paragraph and what Julz wrote in so many ways, that it simply is not worth the time or effort to do so in any way.

    Additionally, I understand Julz may be upset with my use of sarcasm, However, I respectfully point out that both of her posts provide absolutely no basis for discussion, but conclusory statements about how all men are bad and/or wrong. I understand that she may feel frustration, but the picture she paints does not represent reality.

49. angelique Jan 11th 2008 at 02:08 pm 49

    verbosity…

    so I guess, to you, quoting the Bible like Paul does is a non-objectionable basis for logical argument, but ad hominem attacks (which you are evidently vigilant for) are grounds for dismissing a person’s point of view?

    i don’t get you.

    everybody’s got their own arbitrary set of rules of engagement, and you’re no exception.

    pardon me if you perceive my observations to be “ad hominem attack”.

50. Julz Jan 11th 2008 at 02:16 pm 50

    Verbosity, I am not getting into a slanging match with you. I have read through your comments and you do make a few valid points. I didn’t intend to paint all men in the same way. I admit it did sound that way reading it over. I was actually talking about the men I have experience with. I can only comment on those men. I am aware that not all men are the same and when I get into a relationship with a guy I do not judge them on my past experiences. I understand that both people are responsible for the success or failure of a relationship. I never said men are 100% responsible.
    As far as my posts making no basis for discussion that is harsh. This is a forum for people to air their views, frustrations, personal stories, etc. I appreciate the support I get from others in the same situation and listen to those who have a different point of view. However, I do not appreciate a personal attack. Good luck!

51. verbosity Jan 11th 2008 at 03:05 pm 51

    julz,

    Well, I certainly do not think my post was a personal attack at you. For definition’s sake, I consider a personal attack to be something long the lines of what Suze write about me in post 13 -” By the way, you really have to wonder about a guy who comes onto a woman’s dating advice board and starts harping and nagging and getting all hostile and defensive. Kinda makes my point, doesn’t it?”

    You can see where a comment like the one above attacks the person it was directed to (me) without discussing the subject matter. An example of a personal attack is to say, for example, “Julz is a bitter woman” - something I did not do at all. I took pains in my remarks about your statements to limit the remarks to your statements and their implications, not you personally. I understand you may think I overstated my points, and I respect that. I am glad, however, you see my point about over-generalizations.

    I am sensitive to the fact you shared your experiences as a basis for discussion and appreciate it. My constructive criticism is that you made entirely conclusory statements, all of them the worst of men. An analogy is that I came on here and posted “All women are bitches.” Without any background facts or stories, it is difficult, if not impossible to adequately comment. As they say there are 2 sides to every story. I appreciate the fact you may not like what I said or how I said it. However, I think if you read my comments again you will agree that I limited my critique to the content of your words, not of you or your character.

    I understand you and many others view this is a forum for people to air their views, frustrations, personal stories, etc. I agree, but would like to add that I also view it as a forum for people to clarify and critique others’ statements, including factual and logical omissions, with the goal of understanding differing views. In other words, I do not view it as a rant board (not to say you did that).

    That said, I am sorry if your experience with men is as you’ve described. I wish you the best of luck and do look forward to further discussions.

52. Selena Jan 11th 2008 at 03:08 pm 52

    Ladies,
    Why are you bothering? Haven’t you noticed Verbosity is systematically posting the same thing (cutting and pasting!) on this blog thread by thread? Any criticism is perceived as an ad hominem attack. I don’t know about you, but this is getting waaay old for me.

53. verbosity Jan 11th 2008 at 04:03 pm 53

    Angelique,

    I do not have arbitrary rules of engagement at all, contrary to what it appears you think. I will say that procedurally, my issue is where others do not respond to the contents or implication of comments, but about the commentator, as you have done.

    If a goal of this forum is to have a healthy debate about the male/female condition, posting insults about others posters while ignoring their comments does nothing to further the debate. It merely coarsens, cheapens the debate, and shows great disrespect for everyone else, particularly the targets of the comments. I mentioned Suze’s comment about me in post 13 as an example -” By the way, you really have to wonder about a guy who comes onto a woman’s dating advice board and starts harping and nagging and getting all hostile and defensive. Kinda makes my point, doesn’t it?”

    Angelique, there is nothing in these ‘attack the messenger’ tactics that advance the debate. For example, if I point out that women initiate 70% of divorces as a reason men are hesitant to commit and you call me a bitter whiner, you (A) do not respond to my point and (B) attack me personally in the process. I trust you understand this distinction.

    I also think you misread my posting regarding Paul’s comments. Paul has stated his Biblical approach to man and women as a basis for his viewpoint. As I mentioned above, I don’t think the model applies now. I therefore submit your comment (” . . . so I guess, to you, quoting the Bible like Paul does is a non-objectionable basis for logical argument . . .”) is wrong.

    Also, for your reference, your posting questioning me, implying I am arbitrary is the very definition of an ad hominem attack. It does nothing to advance the debate, but seeks to harm the messenger.

54. verbosity Jan 11th 2008 at 04:07 pm 54

    Selena,

    I am not going to post a lengthy reply. Suffice it to say, I have found the main debate tactic here to simply attack me, not to respond to anything I say, the vast majority of which is supported by statistics and surveys.

    Curious how no one, including you, has responded to the content. If it gets waaaay o