Why is it that most of the women who are perfect for a monogamous relationship don't want one?

[cyphorX]

  Every time I get on a dating site I pour through dozens of profiles and every time I find a profile I like from a woman that kept herself in shape, has no kids at home, does not have a demanding time consuming job, similar hobbies or interests, when it get to the part where it states what they are looking for it's almost always "casual dating/nothing serious" on POF, and "non-monogamous" on okayCupid .    98% of the profiles where women are seeking "longterm or marriage"  she is either Obese(not just a little chubby), a single mother(I thought this would get better as I got older but it seems half the women in my dating pool didn't start having kids until their late 30's or 40's or had one last a change of life baby with their EX husband before he took off), taking care of aging parents, raising their grand-kids, or they live outside of the city limits way out in the middle of nowhere.

 It's so frustrating, The only women who seem to want a relationship have baggage that would make a relationship less rewarding and those who would be ideal don't want to date just one person.

 

[d0nnivain]

Everybody comes with baggage past a certain age.  The trick is to find somebody with a carry on only. 

It's  a numbers game. I joke that DH & I found the last remaining unicorns:  Never married, no kids, over 35 & sane.    

I suggest maybe you be a little more flexible about the job, the parents & the kids.  Busy people know how to prioritize & make time for things / people that are important to them.  They also know the value of hard work.  Caregivers are emotionally generous people so they know how to love.  I am not saying don't have standards; I am saying compromise enough to meet someone who checks most of your boxes even if not all of them.  

[Gaeta]

I don't know, seems to me all the interesting men I came across online were not into serious relationship either. 

I think overall online dating isn't serious to start with.

I spent 3,5 years online and I went from one player to another, finally found my someone to discover 5 years later he was the biggest player of them all.

I sympathize with your frustration. 

 

[cyphorX]

38 minutes ago, d0nnivain said:

Everybody comes with baggage past a certain age.  The trick is to find somebody with a carry on only. 

It's  a numbers game. I joke that DH & I found the last remaining unicorns:  Never married, no kids, over 35 & sane.    

I suggest maybe you be a little more flexible about the job, the parents & the kids.  Busy people know how to prioritize & make time for things / people that are important to them.  They also know the value of hard work.  Caregivers are emotionally generous people so they know how to love.  I am not saying don't have standards; I am saying compromise enough to meet someone who checks most of your boxes even if not all of them.  

I understand nobody is perfect, I'm just saying the ones closest to perfect (for me) aren't looking or they want to play the field, maybe that's why they don't want a long term relationship, because they know they have all the options so they just wanna have fun dating around instead of being locked down to one guy.

 

27 minutes ago, Gaeta said:

I don't know, seems to me all the interesting men I came across online were not into serious relationship either. 

I think overall online dating isn't serious to start with.

I spent 3,5 years online and I went from one player to another, finally found my someone to discover 5 years later he was the biggest player of them all.

I sympathize with your frustration. 

 

 It's interesting that you speak of being interesting, while I was talking about having time for a relationship(as most of the things I mentioned are thing that take away from time with each other), not criticizing just notice difference in criteria.

[Gaeta]

2 minutes ago, cyphorX said:

 It's interesting that you speak of being interesting, while I was talking about having time for a relationship(as most of the things I mentioned are thing that take away from time with each other), not criticizing just notice difference in criteria.

I meant 'interesting to me' as in I was interested in getting to know them. Overall my point is I view online as less and less a good place to meet someone to date. The men I would have dated were not interested in a monogamous relationship either they just wanted to have fun and play the field like these women you're talking about. I think online is a place that collects mostly recently divorced or separated people not interested in connecting and developing a relationship. 

[Happy Lemming]

48 minutes ago, Gaeta said:

I spent 3,5 years online and I went from one player to another, finally found my someone to discover 5 years later he was the biggest player of them all.

@Gaeta

So the (5 year) guy you broke up with (recently)... you had originally met him from an on-line dating source??

[cyphorX]

9 minutes ago, Gaeta said:

I meant 'interesting to me' as in I was interested in getting to know them. Overall my point is I view online as less and less a good place to meet someone to date. The men I would have dated were not interested in a monogamous relationship either they just wanted to have fun and play the field like these women you're talking about. I think online is a place that collects mostly recently divorced or separated people not interested in connecting and developing a relationship. 

 You have a point, I sometimes think online dating was better when it still had a stigma, as most who used those site were those who RRReeeaaallllyyy wanted to find someone, now the causal daters have taken over.

[Gaeta]

@Happy Lemming Yes we met on a dating site.

[cleverusername]

Location matters: Cities where women are super career oriented like DC and NY I've found have a lot more single women who are older and with less baggage. They simply put career first due to the location and are more serious about stuff later on. Completely different than a smaller town without the large professional network.

Just my observation. 

[d0nnivain]

Those with options do tend to want to exercise them.  

FWIW when I met the man who is now my husband we were on different sites & outside of each other's parameters.  I was too old for him & he was too young for me.  I'm not a fan of OLD for a lot of reasons; that is just one example but now with the pandemic it's not that easy to meet people IRL.  

[Interstellar]

I signed up on Hinge and there’s a lot of candidates for the No Carb Left Behind program.

Not to be hypocritical, I love carbs too but come on...you gotta start taking care of your health and fitness at a certain point, and want to look good naked.

Fortunately, I live in a big city so online is a backup option.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Interstellar

[cyphorX]

55 minutes ago, d0nnivain said:

Those with options do tend to want to exercise them.  

FWIW when I met the man who is now my husband we were on different sites & outside of each other's parameters.  I was too old for him & he was too young for me.  I'm not a fan of OLD for a lot of reasons; that is just one example but now with the pandemic it's not that easy to meet people IRL.  

 yep the degree in which most people value their romantic relationships is directly proportionate to the options they have available. it's why relationships often end when one of the parties in a couple has a sudden rise in their relationship market value(like when a chubby or fat girl leaves her husband or boyfriend of several years when she loses weight, or some guy finally passes the bar or finishes medical school and leaves his wife or girlfriend a few months to a year later), it's because they now have access to a whole new level of potential partners that wouldn't have given them a second glance before.

[cyphorX]

14 minutes ago, Interstellar said:

I signed up on Hinge and there’s a lot of candidates for the No Carb Left Behind program.

Not to be hypocritical, I love carbs too but come on...you gotta start taking care of your health and fitness at a certain point, and want to look good naked.

Fortunately, I live in a big city so online is a backup option.

   Actually big cities are worse because you have too much competition, and you don't have the "I'm the best of what's left" bonus once all the top 20% guys have been married off the market.

Edited March 15, 2021 by cyphorX

[MsJayne]

Many people put "casual dating", but in fact they are looking for a long term partner. I used to do it, and the reason was that I had met too many people who, back when I had "long term" ticked, would get all huffy, (and a couple of times a little stalker-ish 😬), if I didn't want to pursue an exclusive relationship with them, like they thought "long term" means you're desperate and anyone will do. If you put 'casual' you have a Get Out Of Jail card if you don't want to continue seeing someone. Best just to chat to, and then go on a date with women you find attractive without having huge expectations, or demands, of a committed relationship. Then you see where it goes. People's dating profiles are often misleading, and that includes their stated intentions. 

Also, it does sound like you're looking for a childless supermodel with no relationship or dating history, so in return you need to be Mr Universe, a virgin, and come with a hefty bank balance.  

Edited March 15, 2021 by MsJayne

[SaraSays]

10 minutes ago, SaraSays said:

(like when a chubby or fat girl leaves her husband or boyfriend of several years when she loses weight, or some guy finally passes the bar or finishes medical school and leaves his wife or girlfriend a few months to a year later)

You mention something intellectual in relation to the man in the above. Have you noticed the difference in what you posted about a woman v's a man?

[cyphorX]

6 minutes ago, MsJayne said:

Many people put "casual dating", but in fact they are looking for a long term partner. I used to do it, and the reason was that I had met too many people who, back when I had "long term" ticked, would get all huffy, (and a couple of times a little stalker-ish 😬), if I didn't want to pursue an exclusive relationship with them, like they thought "long term" means you're desperate and anyone will do. If you put 'casual' you have a Get Out Of Jail card if you don't want to continue seeing someone. Best just to chat to, and then go on a date with women you find attractive without having huge expectations, or demands, of a committed relationship. Then you see where it goes. People's dating profiles are often misleading, and that includes their stated intentions. 

 So I'm making the mistake of assuming a woman is honest when she states what she is seeking?  I'm not assuming a woman seeking "longterm" mean I will be "the one" it just means that's her end goal, and if we have enough in common that's where things will lead. "casual dating/nothing serious"  is a nicer way of saying Either "friends with benefits" or a woman wanting a free diner that I will never see again.  early on I fell for a lot of that a lot of wasted time I will never get back. never has "casual dating/nothing serious" led to anything more than just what it says, yes it has led to FWB some I can call now years later but never an actual exclusive relationship.

Well actually one asked me if I wanted to try long term last year, 6 years after we "casual dating/nothing serious" on and off for months, and i was insulted she was a lot heavier and aged more like 10 years ,sad thing is if she had wanted longterm when we met I'd be fine with how she looks now as we have similar personalities, liked the same things and even ran in the same circles in the late 80's early 90's(we just happened not to meet each other back then but we knew many of the same people and hung out in the same places) but basically she did not want to settle down until she was no longer attracting a wide range of men who wanted to take her out on the town.

 

[Gaeta]

41 minutes ago, MsJayne said:

Many people put "casual dating", but in fact they are looking for a long term partner.

I would never do that lol. 

When I was online I had *looking for a serious relationship* and I STILL had to chase away the casual/nothingserious men.

I really don't see a man putting himself in the no-serious-dating and deep down wanting a relationship. The man putting himself in the no-serious-dating is looking for a friend with benefit and he's sincere and honest enough to not pretend he wants a relationship. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Gaeta

[Lotsgoingon]

3 hours ago, cyphorX said:

 It's interesting that you speak of being interesting, while I was talking about having time for a relationship(as most of the things I mentioned are thing that take away from time with each other), not criticizing just notice difference in criteria.

Dude, this thinking is so flawed. Some of the busiest people I know are organized and make tons of time for relationships precisely because they can plan. And the reason they are busy is because they are alive and vibrant. 

Seriously your algorithm is off if you think someone without a demanding job (and you're guessing here because people at the same job-profession can work vastly different hours) is therefore more available for relationship.

I think you're screening out all kinds of fabulous people based on your assumption that having a demanding job or a demanding hobby means they are not available. Ever heard the expression: you want something done, give it to a busy person to do. Because the busy people are organized, can prioritize, can schedule, can show up when they say they will show up and so on. 

People's "availability" has far more to do with their emotional makeup than it has to do with their jobs. If you think otherwise, why not seek unemployed people?

What you want to screen for to detect availability is something far simpler: the ability to prioritize and the ability to say no. To be available, people have to be able to say no (sometimes) to other friends, to family, to others who they do not really want to spend time with. The ability to say "no" is a much better measure of availability than job title. But you can only evaluate this skill by first meeting with them. 

 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Lotsgoingon

[cyphorX]

3 minutes ago, Lotsgoingon said:

Dude, this thinking is so flawed. Some of the busiest people I know are organized and make tons of time for relationships precisely because they can plan. And the reason they are busy is because they are alive and vibrant. 

Seriously your algorithm is off if you think someone without a demanding job (and you're guessing here because people at the same job-profession can work vastly different hours) is therefore more available for relationship.

I think you're screening out all kinds of fabulous people based on your assumption that having a demanding job or a demanding hobby means they are not available. Ever heard the expression: you want something done, give it to a busy person to do. Because the busy people are organized, can prioritize, can schedule, can show up when they say they will show up and so on. 

People's "availability" has far more to do with their emotional makeup than it has to do with their jobs. If you think otherwise, why not seek unemployed people?

 

 When I say demanding job,  I'm talking about those people who are always working and networking, and when off work they are so drained that they wanna crash after they finish the work they brought home.  I have a flexible schedule put in 40 a week and when I have a GF want to spend the majority of the time I'm not working with her. So I would need a partner who is the same way, getting a day here and a few hours there gets old quickly.

[SpecialJ]

I think it's far less about have more dating options to "have fun" with or this idea of higher market value and more about "have my own busy and fulfilling life and don't need a partner for anything specific so don't see a need to invest in a committed relationship that may get messy or result in my becoming a caretaker"... it has to really be the right match to make it worthwhile at that point. People without kids, with jobs who can financially support themselves, and who are physically fit likely have many hobbies and interests keeping them fit when they're outside of work and as a result may be less likely to prioritize romantic relationships. And/or they may be just out of long relationships and looking for an emotional break from commitment. Add this to the fact that most older folks who always wanted to be in committed relationships / married / have kids probably already are, those who weren't interested in commitment or have commitment issues or are avoidant probably aren't, and you get a bunch of older singles online not looking for what you're looking for. 

 

At least they're up front about it so you don't waste your time. But you may need to look elsewhere offline (like within common hobby groups -- try running or biking or other outdoor groups if you want fit women for active lifestyle reasons -- or singles events with themes that appeal to your interests and don't skew to too many men and few women in attendance). I found what I was looking for online but I had to sort through hundreds if not thousands of profiles AND get lucky that we were compatible on and off paper. It required patience and taking time off for breaks when numbers game dating was getting frustrating and tedious. The people you're looking for are out there, but may not be on dating sites in mass numbers. 

 

I'm also thinking that if you want women with no other obligations... older and fully monogamous but no children, not helping out with grandchildren, not caretaking for parents, so essentially not very involved with family period... you're not exactly looking at a pool of women who prioritize nurturing relationships. They'll be more into their own thing and it isn't surprising they aren't clamoring for commitment. So you may want to reflect further on your expectations and the characteristics you value and find rewarding. If you're sure of exactly what you want, though, then just find different ways of putting yourself out there. May take more time, but you'll find it eventually. 

[Lotsgoingon]

But you don't really know how busy they are until you meet them right? You seemed to suggest that you figured out how busy they were based on their online profiles. 

BTW: lots of folks might react strangely to your desire to spend the majority of non-working time with your spouse. Don't you have other interests? Other friends? 

And lots of people with family and previous relationships can make time for their present partner. You're making huge assumptions here.  Also, lots of busy people do prioritize relationships. They might be more picky. So probably best to say they prioritize good relationships. They're not going to drop all their interests just to get with any man. But with the right person, who shows he's worth spending time with, yes, they will find a way to spend good time with that person. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Lotsgoingon

[Gaeta]

5 minutes ago, cyphorX said:

  I have a flexible schedule put in 40 a week and when I have a GF want to spend the majority of the time I'm not working with her. 

This is something you build over time, not when you start dating someone. This is for 2 years down the road when you move in together and still you should both keep your respective hobbies and friends and have some time away from each other. For a man to want to spend 100% of his free time with his girlfriend is pretty unusual. Men usually value their alone/friends time. Actually they need it to feel balanced. 

[dramafreezone]

5 hours ago, cyphorX said:

  Every time I get on a dating site I pour through dozens of profiles and every time I find a profile I like from a woman that kept herself in shape, has no kids at home, does not have a demanding time consuming job, similar hobbies or interests, when it get to the part where it states what they are looking for it's almost always "casual dating/nothing serious" on POF, and "non-monogamous" on okayCupid .    98% of the profiles where women are seeking "longterm or marriage"  she is either Obese(not just a little chubby), a single mother(I thought this would get better as I got older but it seems half the women in my dating pool didn't start having kids until their late 30's or 40's or had one last a change of life baby with their EX husband before he took off), taking care of aging parents, raising their grand-kids, or they live outside of the city limits way out in the middle of nowhere.

 It's so frustrating, The only women who seem to want a relationship have baggage that would make a relationship less rewarding and those who would be ideal don't want to date just one person.

 

What does that mean "perfect for a monogamous relattionship?"  The main criteria for being ideal for a monogamous relationship is wanting to be in one.

You're asking why women that have everything going for them don't feel as compelled to find one person as those who have children or who are heavier?  People with options in general don't want to tie themselves down to one person, at least not readily.

That said, I think most women would be willing to be exclusive for the right person.  You think these women on these OLD sites would turn down Ryan Gosling or Bradley Cooper if they asked them to be exclusive?  No, they would likely compromise that stiuplation for that guy, because he's one of the best, and how much better could she do?

What she says in her account about not wanting anything serious means nothing to me.  All you can do is be the best version of yourself, she'll either take it or she won't.  If she likes you a ton she'll break her rules about not wanting a relationship.

Edited March 15, 2021 by dramafreezone

[cyphorX]

7 minutes ago, Lotsgoingon said:

But you don't really know how busy they are until you meet them right? You seemed to suggest that you figured out how busy they were based on their online profiles. 

BTW: lots of folks might react strangely to your desire to spend the majority of non-working time with your spouse. Don't you have other interests? Other friends? 

And lots of people with family and previous relationships can make time for their present partner. You're making huge assumptions here.

That also why I look for women who have similar interests and hobbies, the more of those you have in common the more things you can do together, also you can tell early on how busy someone is, but yes from experience from dating different types of people early on some jobs/careers tend to have less free time than others

 

9 minutes ago, SpecialJ said:

I think it's far less about have more dating options to "have fun" with or this idea of higher market value and more about "have my own busy and fulfilling life and don't need a partner for anything specific so don't see a need to invest in a committed relationship that may get messy or result in my becoming a caretaker"... it has to really be the right match to make it worthwhile at that point. People without kids, with jobs who can financially support themselves, and who are physically fit likely have many hobbies and interests keeping them fit when they're outside of work and as a result may be less likely to prioritize romantic relationships. And/or they may be just out of long relationships and looking for an emotional break from commitment. Add this to the fact that most older folks who always wanted to be in committed relationships / married / have kids probably already are, those who weren't interested in commitment or have commitment issues or are avoidant probably aren't, and you get a bunch of older singles online not looking for what you're looking for. 

 

At least they're up front about it so you don't waste your time. But you may need to look elsewhere offline (like within common hobby groups -- try running or biking or other outdoor groups if you want fit women for active lifestyle reasons -- or singles events with themes that appeal to your interests and don't skew to too many men and few women in attendance). I found what I was looking for online but I had to sort through hundreds if not thousands of profiles AND get lucky that we were compatible on and off paper. It required patience and taking time off for breaks when numbers game dating was getting frustrating and tedious. The people you're looking for are out there, but may not be on dating sites in mass numbers. 

 

I'm also thinking that if you want women with no other obligations... older and fully monogamous but no children, not helping out with grandchildren, not caretaking for parents, so essentially not very involved with family period... you're not exactly looking at a pool of women who prioritize nurturing relationships. They'll be more into their own thing and it isn't surprising they aren't clamoring for commitment. So you may want to reflect further on your expectations and the characteristics you value and find rewarding. If you're sure of exactly what you want, though, then just find different ways of putting yourself out there. May take more time, but you'll find it eventually. 

   Actually the best matches I've had have been RECENT empty-nesters who were involved active mothers, one that comes to mind I started dating 3 weeks after her youngest son went off to college, and 2 years after her divorce(her ex husband was a rich dude who got all the friends in the divorce) I was the first guy she dated after said divorce. if her job had not moved her out of state and offered her double her money we would probably still be together now we dated awhile after she moved but I can't do long distance.   As far as meetups I went to a ton of those, Cycling, lan gaming, AD&D, hiking all geared toward singles and every one of them turned out to be a sausagefest.  and the few women were quickly paired off.

And like on OLD the few that showed interest in me wanted nothing serious.

[SumGuy]

Are you only looking at POF and OKCupid?  Where I live they are known as the hookup sites, not the ones frequented by people looking for long-term or monogamous.