Half of Singles Don't Want a Relationship or Even a Date

[QuietRiot]

An article on Psychology Today states the above and that...will post the first paragraph, and not the link...for obvious reasons...

A just-released report from the Pew Research Center sends a dagger straight through the heart of a popular mythology—the one that insists that what single people want, more than anything else, is to become coupled. So untrue. The findings, based on a national, random sampling of nearly 5,000 adults in the U.S., showed that 50 percent of single people are not interested in a committed romantic relationship and they are not even interested in a date.

This was found most prominent for those who have done marriage already and with older women.

The study was done on those "socially" single, not legally single. "Socially" meaning there are some that have no desire of any kind of dating experiences.

[chillii]

Can't see a problem even if it's true but don't forget a lot of single people talk tough because it's easier than reality. ln my experience though it's very often another story get them late at night with a few drinks under their belt and it all starts coming out,The other 50% though even if it is right well , that' ok , they still have their 50%. 

[basil67]

Did you think otherwise?   We've already discussed women who no longer want to date in a lengthy thread.

[QuietRiot]

1 minute ago, basil67 said:

Did you think otherwise?   We've already discussed women who no longer want to date in a lengthy thread.

What was interesting, the article just appeared in my feed today. lol

[alphamale]

yea but if "mr. or mrs. right"  comes along they'll be singing a different tune

[amerikajin]

The traditional marriage and dating scene has been blown to smithereens by social and technological change. My little crackpot hypothesis goes something like this:

Long-term relationships (read: engagement and marriage) were a product of wealthy patriarchy. For 10,000 years or so, men basically enslaved women in the institution of marriage. But sexual liberation and women's independence have basically enabled women to control what happens in a lot of relationships these days. In fact, one could argue that women set the standards of what will and won't fly in modern marriage. The result is that long-term relationships encounter social tension - a tension between the traditional roles of men who grow up thinking that they are breadwinners, spend time outside the house, and leave the domestic s*** to women...and the new picture of marriage in which women challenge these norms and can leave if they don't believe that men are compatible.

If it sounds like I'm blaming women, I guess I am in a sense, but I do so acknowledging that the traditional marriage was unfair to women and hardly serves as an ideal. In short, I guess what I'm really saying isn't so much that divorce is women's fault, but rather, because of all these social changes, both genders struggle to define what long-term relationships are these days. On the positive side, if they both can find a way to get it right, these long-term relationships can be really fulfilling - probably as close to true romantic love as one could find. But as one takes a long hike through the jungle of romance and stumbles upon the carcasses and bones of others' failed marriages, the realization is that finding the right balance - for both genders - is often damn hard.

So knowing that, yeah, people tend to have a s***ty outlook on love, romance, and marriage these days.

And then there's Tinder thingy that lets young people just select a f*** buddy like they're shopping for something on Amazon. Where the hell was this when I was in my early 20s and basically shocking my monkey by my lonesome on many a weekend?! I was so born at the wrong time.

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by amerikajin

[hotpotato]

2 hours ago, alphamale said:

yea but if "mr. or mrs. right"  comes along they'll be singing a different tune

I dont know about that. 

I think I'm too deep into singledom to date someone no matter how much I liked them.  I'm not sure how I would integrate him into my life. At my age I'd would not only be him but his kids and to some degree his baby mommas. I'm used to doing as I please aside from work and responsibilities. 

My life is getting good and exciting. I think it's easier to date if someone is somewhat unhappy with being single. 

If mr. Right came right now, I'd consider that quite unfortunate. I needed Mr right years ago. I'm good now. 

 

 

[chillii]

4 hours ago, alphamale said:

yea but if "mr. or mrs. right"  comes along they'll be singing a different tune

yep, exactly.

[chillii]

2 hours ago, hotpotato said:

I dont know about that. 

I think I'm too deep into singledom to date someone no matter how much I liked them.  I'm not sure how I would integrate him into my life. At my age I'd would not only be him but his kids and to some degree his baby mommas. I'm used to doing as I please aside from work and responsibilities. 

My life is getting good and exciting. I think it's easier to date if someone is somewhat unhappy with being single. 

If mr. Right came right now, I'd consider that quite unfortunate. I needed Mr right years ago. I'm good now. 

 

 

 

Haaa and fair enough , l don't see what the problem is if people wanna stay single good luck to them. l know guys 50s will never be involved again so what that's ok , makes no difference to anything. Do whatever makes you happy l say.

 

 

 

 

[basil67]

4 hours ago, alphamale said:

yea but if "mr. or mrs. right"  comes along they'll be singing a different tune

But Mr or Ms Right will have to both find and then woo the person who's not interested in dating.    

I love my husband very much, but I can't imagine dating again if I was widowed.  Partly because I don't think anyone could be as good for me as he is...and does a new Mr Right really want to be competing with a ghost?   And does he have the determination to prove me wrong?

Basically, Mr or Ms Right has to work out how to prise open the shutters.

Edited August 23, 2020 by basil67

[chillii]

lt's automatic in a lot of cases just takes the right key. Swore black and blue l'd never get involved again especially not remarry butttt, the right person came along anddddd !

ps , although l could well imagine if one was to pass , different kettle of fish l think.

Edited August 23, 2020 by chillii

[QuietRiot]

11 hours ago, chillii said:

Can't see a problem even if it's true but don't forget a lot of single people talk tough because it's easier than reality. ln my experience though it's very often another story get them late at night with a few drinks under their belt and it all starts coming out,The other 50% though even if it is right well , that' ok , they still have their 50%. 

So you're saying, of those that were surveyed, they could be lying about not desiring some kind of romantic companionship in their life? I kind of agree to be honest...it's a way for them to cope for being unattached for so long I suppose.

Probably makes them feel better to say it out loud. lol

Edited August 23, 2020 by QuietRiot

[QuietRiot]

7 hours ago, hotpotato said:

I dont know about that. 

I think I'm too deep into singledom to date someone no matter how much I liked them.  I'm not sure how I would integrate him into my life. At my age I'd would not only be him but his kids and to some degree his baby mommas. I'm used to doing as I please aside from work and responsibilities. 

My life is getting good and exciting. I think it's easier to date if someone is somewhat unhappy with being single. 

If mr. Right came right now, I'd consider that quite unfortunate. I needed Mr right years ago. I'm good now. 

 

 

Not sure what you're getting at with the bolded...I'm to surmise that you generalized all single men this way? There are some single, never had kids men out there, even at your age.

[hotpotato]

16 minutes ago, QuietRiot said:

Not sure what you're getting at with the bolded...I'm to surmise that you generalized all single men this way? There are some single, never had kids men out there, even at your age.

 Where I live that's quite a small pool. Not only do they usually have kids, but they often have 2 or 3. My on/off fwb has 5. Their kids are minors so baby momma has to be in the picture. 

[some_username1]

10 hours ago, amerikajin said:

The traditional marriage and dating scene has been blown to smithereens by social and technological change. My little crackpot hypothesis goes something like this:

Long-term relationships (read: engagement and marriage) were a product of wealthy patriarchy. For 10,000 years or so, men basically enslaved women in the institution of marriage. But sexual liberation and women's independence have basically enabled women to control what happens in a lot of relationships these days. In fact, one could argue that women set the standards of what will and won't fly in modern marriage. The result is that long-term relationships encounter social tension - a tension between the traditional roles of men who grow up thinking that they are breadwinners, spend time outside the house, and leave the domestic s*** to women...and the new picture of marriage in which women challenge these norms and can leave if they don't believe that men are compatible.

If it sounds like I'm blaming women, I guess I am in a sense, but I do so acknowledging that the traditional marriage was unfair to women and hardly serves as an ideal. In short, I guess what I'm really saying isn't so much that divorce is women's fault, but rather, because of all these social changes, both genders struggle to define what long-term relationships are these days. On the positive side, if they both can find a way to get it right, these long-term relationships can be really fulfilling - probably as close to true romantic love as one could find. But as one takes a long hike through the jungle of romance and stumbles upon the carcasses and bones of others' failed marriages, the realization is that finding the right balance - for both genders - is often damn hard.

So knowing that, yeah, people tend to have a s***ty outlook on love, romance, and marriage these days.

And then there's Tinder thingy that lets young people just select a f*** buddy like they're shopping for something on Amazon. Where the hell was this when I was in my early 20s and basically shocking my monkey by my lonesome on many a weekend?! I was so born at the wrong time.

 

I think there is a fair bit of truth to that but I also think that there was good reason for the institution of marriage that our wiser forebears understood and that has been forgotten over time rather like the kick back against globalised finance that took place following WWII that has been eroded by capitalists who thought they knew better and which caused a global crash in 2008 and the covid related one today. Basically, to give a very simplistic overview, history shows us that female sexual liberation usually leads to the downfall of civilisations and that’s why I feel marriage was instituted- it gives men a positive role in furthering society because they have a family to invest in and take care of and women have a stable platform to raise kids in. However the nanny state has taken over the role of the husband, contraception has allowed women sexual relations with who they like, leaving a lot of men disenfranchised from society as they won’t ever have a family to be productive for- hence the rise of the man child which is not good for wider society, especially if more and more men turn to crime to get their kicks . This isn’t me bashing anyone I should add, just a dispassionate analysis of how our liberal society has perhaps become too free. We are still in the early days yet but I can imagine in two or three generations time society agreeing that actually the best paradigm for *most* and for functioning society is stable marriage based women preferring to be the caregiver and to stay at home while the man is the breadwinner. Whether capitalism can put that genie back in the bottle and go back to housing and living being affordable on a single wage though is another question entirely.

For me personally I’ve been single a long time. At first I hated it and had a real sense of entitlement that I should have the finest women just because everyone else has got one. That was because I was scared of being alone and marketing and advertising loves to tell you that you are “less than” as a man if you can’t inspire the love of a woman. Many years later and I have the opposite attitude now, I am very very happy with my freedom as I look around at all my friends in their dead marriages with kids they struggle to cope with. I have no ties and can do as I please and when you see how negative relationships can be in terms of people being controlled by their partners it really doesn’t seem worth it long term.

As I write this I had big plans to spend today trying to take some photos for a new dating profile but I feel really unenthusiastic about it. I could spend that time far better working towards my own personal goals. It’s a far cry from the way I used to think about having to find a partner at all costs. So I can quite see how people who have come to terms with being single soon come to prefer it to being in a bad relationship. Don’t get me wrong I am sure most single people (me included) would swap singledom for the perfect relationship with the right person. We are all ultimately looking for someone who “gets” us. But a lot of us who are older and have seen a bit of life know that life is not a fairytale and far far far more people end up in crap relationships than they end up in great ones with someone they can class as a soul mate. 
 

So yeah, in short it makes perfect sense to me that 50% of single people feel happy being single. It doesn’t carry the stigma it once did that’s for sure.

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by some_username1

[alphamale]

lets not forget that up until 100 years ago most people married for practical reasons...now people marry for romantic love.

[amerikajin]

49 minutes ago, alphamale said:

lets not forget that up until 100 years ago most people married for practical reasons...now people marry for romantic love.

Yes, ALPHAMALE, that is correct.

[elaine567]

1 hour ago, some_username1 said:

I can imagine in two or three generations time society agreeing that actually the best paradigm for *most* and for functioning society is stable marriage based women preferring to be the caregiver and to stay at home while the man is the breadwinner. Whether capitalism can put that genie back in the bottle and go back to housing and living being affordable on a single wage though is another question entirely.

No, not going to happen, IMO.
Capitalism loves the working woman.
Women were "freed" from the "drudgery" of being SAHMs to provide a cheaper workforce for the bosses...
Why have all these young employable women baking cakes and playing with their kids at home when they could be working, being productive and paying taxes?
Once you removed the burden of a having a child every year from women, here was the perfect workforce... 
Suddenly low paid workers were everywhere and they provided a flexible, enthusiastic and cheap workforce.
The double wage fed consumerism and faced with large financial commitments the workforce were in effect forced to keep working to pay the mortgage and the bills and to maintain their standard of living... Nothing better than employees who have over extended themselves financially...
Childcare facilities, elderly care facilities and service industries flourished and provided even more low paid jobs for women to do, with high profits for the bosses...
The "problem" now is that women want "more", they want paid better, they want the top jobs, they want a seat at the table, they want equal power.
That was a bit of a shocker to those who held the power, hence the back lash against feminism in general.
"Women just  need to get back to these low paid jobs that suited everyone so well..."

The  corollary however is that a working woman or a woman with her own money, no longer NEEDS a man.
 

[FMW]

8 hours ago, basil67 said:

Partly because I don't think anyone could be as good for me as he is...and does a new Mr Right really want to be competing with a ghost?

That's exactly what my mom says.  She's 73, but very active, very attractive and gets plenty of attention from men.  But she says she had the best and it wouldn't be fair to any other man.  

On the flip side, I'm 55, divorced, not bitter about, but just a little bruised.  I don't need partnership for financial or other security reasons, but I certainly still want romance and love with someone.

I think age and marital status (divorced, widowed) would provide more meaningful results.       

[some_username1]

7 minutes ago, elaine567 said:

No, not going to happen, IMO.
Capitalism loves the working woman.
Women were "freed" from the "drudgery" of being SAHMs to provide a cheaper workforce for the bosses...
Why have all these young employable women baking cakes and playing with their kids at home when they could be working, being productive and paying taxes?
Once you removed the burden of a having a child every year from women, here was the perfect workforce... 
Suddenly low paid workers were everywhere and they provided a flexible, enthusiastic and cheap workforce.
The double wage fed consumerism and faced with large financial commitments the workforce were in effect forced to keep working to pay the mortgage and the bills and to maintain their standard of living... Nothing better than employees who have over extended themselves financially...
Childcare facilities, elderly care facilities and service industries flourished and provided even more low paid jobs for women to do, with high profits for the bosses...
The "problem" now is that women want "more", they want paid better, they want the top jobs, they want a seat at the table, they want equal power.
That was a bit of a shocker to those who held the power, hence the back lash against feminism in general.
"Women just  need to get back to these low paid jobs that suited everyone so well..."

The  corollary however is that a working woman or a woman with her own money, no longer NEEDS a man.
 

Good analysis of the positive benefit for capitalism, I’ve seen it suggested that the reason that housing became so expensive is down to the realisation that two people could be charged 4x their wage instead of one because of women in the workplace, so capitalism definitely enjoys female labour in the workforce. I’m not sure it’s better for society though and it will become more apparent in future years.

We always think we know better than our forebears and I’m not sure we really do, hence why history has a very cyclical nature to it as we make the mistakes our forebears did and then scramble to put systems in place that our descendentes will one day tear apart again. As happy as I am to be single I’m not sure that happy singletons is a good thing for society going forwards. 

[Wiseman2]

Wouldn't it be worse if half the people in committed relationships wanted to be single?

[Ruby Slippers]

9 minutes ago, Wiseman2 said:

Wouldn't it be worse if half the people in committed relationships wanted to be single?

They probably do 

[Els]

4 hours ago, some_username1 said:

history shows us that female sexual liberation usually leads to the downfall of civilisations

Want to cite exactly which civilizations these are and which year in history their "downfalls" happened?

By and large female liberation (not just sexual, but including that) has strongly correlated with higher economic and development indices. It's not a coincidence that the countries which give women the least liberty in the world are also generally the least developed, and vice versa, with the sole exception of oil-rich Middle Eastern countries. When you exclude 50% of your population from progress, you will progress at 50% of the pace, and when your country is overpopulated, there are insufficient resources to go around.

leaving a lot of men disenfranchised from society as they won’t ever have a family to be productive for

Even back in the "good ol' days" there were plenty of men who would not ever have a family. Polygyny and social stratification meant that there were quite a few poor peasants who did not have a wife, because the richer men had multiple wives. They were "productive" because the alternative was starving to death.

 

[Fair]

Most people want relationships. If they don't now, they will at some point. People aren't hardwired to be alone. Studies like this are senseless and are bound to be skewed. 

[central]

I would want a relationship if single again.  I also have friends who are happily single with full lives, and they don't even try to date - and haven't for 20 years or more.  Yes, most people want relationships, but friendship is a relationship and suffices for many.