Skip to comments.Why Men Won't Commit: Men's Atitudes About Sex, Dating and Marriage
Posted on 10/22/2002 11:24:51 AM PDT by shrinkermd
click here to read article
Running and ducking.......heheheheheh
But at 37, I realize I am not going to find that soulmate. Dating in A.D. 2002 is an exercise in frustration and humiliation. From this and other like threads, I know that I'll have a lot of other singles for company in the retirement home that lays in my future.
Moreover, the sexual revolution and the trend toward cohabitation offer them some of the benefits of marriage without its obligations.
Encodes an attitude human relationships and an shallowness. There is an emphasis on sexual satisfaction here. A developed relationships between a man and woman is more than that. It also helps if you really like each other and are close companions. That is what I see going down the drain in contemporary patterns.
There are also things you don't get from another person in less than a permanant committed relationship that provides confidence in the nature of a relationship. Living together doesn't provide that confidence. It is underwritten by an unspoken sense of temporarity or condition.
What reason is there for two people who have been engaging in turnstyle relationships and sex lives to suddenly trust each other. Whether one is that way from the begiining, or is forced to develop it, a serious degree of superficiality and callousness is integral to that pattern. That isn't anything I would personally want to marry.
Agreed. Speaking as a divorced male, single for some time now, the "Great Single Life" is definitely not My preference. Most evenings are spent in front of the computer teaching Myself more and more things, and a can of Chunky Soup or a TV dinner with some cheap beer to wash it down with.
Perhaps some observatios are in order here. One being that the article is entirely correct that the ease of divorce is a very serious impediment to the intent of marriage in this day and age -and moreso if children are involved. I can name you friend after friend that has literally lost it all because there was a major row and the woman did not even consider patching things up to make the relationship work out. Indeed, why should she? Most times she first drained the bank accounts and maxed out the credit cards, then used the system to get half of everything and alienate the children. Why shouldn't men be unwilling to take that kind of risk?
Also remember the truism: "Men marry women for who they are. Women marry men for what they CAN be". I have had many women admit this to Me over the years. Take it from Me: men do not WANT to be changed, and we want to live with the woman we fell in love with, not the one who enjoys attempting to manipulate us while at the same time expecting us to support their every changing need and moods.
I also agree with the opinion expressed above that most men do not want to have to raise some other male's children, both because of the immediate financial demands, and because you are essentially supporting someone's indescretions -and mistakes. Not to mention the difficulty of allowing for some strange male to constantly generate tension in the relationship.
Another amusing observation I have made over the years is that according to the woman, her 'ex-' is ALWAYS a "Jerk". Some of My friends are ex-'s. Some, granted, are indeed Jerks. Most, however, are merely trying to deal with life as best they can, and to reconcile themselves to the fact that women are not interested in making the relationship work -especially when all the advice groups and women's forums continually insist that "If he starts becoming angry, just LEAVE". Most miss their partners immensely, and wish there was some way to reconcile.
Amazingly enough, however, ALL the women insist that they could not possibly get back together with 'him' -or... perhaps -"but first he has to change".
My question is; why is it always the male who has to change?
Agree with you in part. I had someone do something like this to Me. She has three children, who are really great, and wanted (well, still wants) more from Me than I was willing to give -namely a relationship. I can't help it, I like children -mostly-, and hers are great. I simply am not interested in a relationship with her for obvious reasons. She always mentioned family outings, including nieces and nephews, and picnics and whatnots in order to try to get Me to spend more time with them (her).
Half if you're lucky. Sometimes all.
Greetings, Mate! Good to know you're still 'angin' about!
I found a true love many years ago. She passed away and I was devastated. Now, I would like to find a decent woman to love and marry, but am in no hurry. I am not impressed with the calibre of most of the women I meet, unfortunatwly.
It is actually somewhat amusing at this point. I mean, I was your stereotypical ugly duckling when I was young, but age has changed Me to the point where I am often asked if I will do some modeling (not attempting to sound vain here, merely expressing a point). Even when I was young I was more interested in marriage than a one-night stand, and moreso these days. Now all the women who would not even give Me a second glance those days are quite interested, and I have to shake My head at their antics. Too, I knew some of the blokes they were involved with (the ones I know from back then), and I must say I was not impressed with their choices.
Now they have several children, have let themselves go downhill, and have gone through several other partners since then. That, or I still recall their Feminist rantings when they were younger. Pardon My reluctance, but I believe I have reason to doubt their decision-making abilities at this point.
Blue Zone women are condescending and mean. I'm beginning to think any woman (or man) who grew up watching American televison has absorbed too many poisonous values to make acceptable marriage material.