Advice for the Lady

[Latinoman]

I heard you the first time as was obvious by my post. For the record, I still think you're wrong. Another thing you might want to consider here, is that you and I both know that it's possible you're calling yourself low quality with this opinion.

What option sounds more exciting than a ONS with a brand new woman? Do you recognize that I just asked you a rhetorical question? Ok, I admit, you're entitled to your opinion. You are certainly entitled to opine that the same woman over and over is more exciting to you, no matter how in conflict to Darwinian theory such an opinion will be.

To clarify, it is my opinion that I am a man of high quality. You are certainly entitled to disagree based upon a different definition of what constitutes a high quality man, from me.

You don't get the point.

A man with options will pick the best possible woman. If you engage in a ONS with a random woman...a woman that would have probably phucked any other random man...then you are not that much better than those other random men.

I have high standards. I am NOT going to sleep with a woman that sleeps around with random men...because it LOWERS me to their category.

No offense to any woman in here...but I won't sleep with a woman that sleeps with ghetto or "gang bangers" and for that matter a woman that lacks the common sense to have a random man inside her.

Have I engaged in ONS before? Of course...I have been with married women before. Everybody knows that. And I have been engaged sexually with women in ONE occasion (not with the intention to be a ONS, but just because I did not like the sex and did not want to be with her anymore).

 

[Latinoman]

I was sort of wondering too, because the cheating is forgiveable, especially where it concerns a male.

"Cheating" isn't unnatural. What's unnatural is marriage. If a man occasionally acts like ....... a man, I think there are worse things than that. It's case-by-case but there should be, in most instances, far more damning things that happened than simply cheating to justify a divorce with a man.

I read an article a few weeks back showing some recent research on supposed "mates for life" in the animal kingdom, particularly certain birds and mammals actually showed that episodes of infidelity occurs in many of these cases as well. It seems there really aren't that many genuine mates for life and when it does happen, its quite unnatural.

Adultery is more than grounds for divorce. If you married by the church...then you should abide by the "not commit adultery" rule. The animal kingdome do NOT marry by the church or by court (in which adultery is also grounds for divorce). Come on man...adultery is betrayal of trust. It also put her at risk (such as health).

Cheating is more than grounds for divorce. If a man cheats and gets caught...he should face the consequences. If a man cheats and HURTS his wife (by getting caught)...he should also face the consequences.

Now...do I believe is wrong or right? That's not the point here. Do I beleive it makes the man a "bad person"? Of course not. That's not my point either.

 

[LovelyLady]

Welcome to SoSuave, SouthernGal.

Would you share some background info so I can better understand where you are coming from?

How long were you married? How long have you been divorced? Do the children ever see their Father? Do you have any family support? Do you have any real girl friends? What therapy (if any) have you gotten to deal with the changes you have been through? How many hours are you with your children every week?

 

[azanon]

Adultery is more than grounds for divorce. If you married by the church...then you should abide by the "not commit adultery" rule. The animal kingdome do NOT marry by the church or by court (in which adultery is also grounds for divorce). Come on man...adultery is betrayal of trust. It also put her at risk (such as health).

We're in the animal kingdom, Latinoman. Latinoman, I am a biologist by both degrees and profession.

I am aware that cheating is legally grounds for a divorce. In practice, I think it's often a mistake to do so solely for cheating and has endings such as a woman or man coming to a forum like sosuave.com to deal with their new-found loneliness, kid(s) now with no father or mother in the house, and probably remorse over not trying harder to make their previous commitments work out.

Breaking a commitment has serious consequences. One does that in a marriage when they have the divorce, not when they cheat or are cheated on. Read that again, Latinoman. Mistakes in a "commitment" are only an issue of when, not if.

Now...do I believe is wrong or right? That's not the point here. Do I beleive it makes the man a "bad person"? Of course not. That's not my point either.

No one's arguing what "common law" is in most states. Of course in most states "cheating" is legally grounds for divorce. In fact, I suspect it is sufficient grounds for divorce in every state in the U.S. Like duh, Lationman. The discussion was about whether it should be or not.

 

[Rosemarie]

It's perfectly ok for you to feel this way, but be careful not to speak for all women. It's common knowledge to the DJ that some women are figuratively asexual, by decision or simply physically, and not very susceptible to sexual coercion. An adept DJ picks up on these types quickly and usually move along in short time to the next woman.

Remember the high school boy that quips, "if you won't, a thousand others will". He's actually right, you know.

This might be getting less and less true. What I hear is that the dating pool is a trifle short on women. In real life, I get everything from crap like Jophil's, which is essentially a way of putting pressure on me to do something that isn't in my best interests, to flat-out pleading. They don't even plead for me to date them personally, just to "put myself out there".

I'm not convinced that it's sane, normal or healthy for women to ape male sexual behavior, which is what modern dating essentially forces us to do. If we're single mothers, it puts us in a position of being what you gents call a cvm dumpster, which is frankly even worse.

I certainly wouldn't call myself asexual. I would even go so far as to say that I'm living proof of a recent study which found that single women have more orgasms than partnered women, it's just that I'm not turned on by being used. My impulse to have sex is much, much weaker than my impulse to form intimate relationships, and sex without intimacy is about as thrilling to me as a trip to the gynecologist.

Anyway, assuming that there are indeed a thousand women willing to do what I won't, why should I care? Other people's self-destructive behavior doesn't obligate me to be self-destructive, too, which is pretty much what I'm trying to tell the OP.

A lot of men proclaim that single moms have few or no choices. This isn't true. Nothing obligates any woman to engage in behavior that's hurtful to her or her kids, not even stupid cracks about minivans.

 

[The Bat]

I think jophil is totally owning this thread.

 

[Phyzzle]

What I hear is that the dating pool is a trifle short on women.

She's got us there. I don't see why Jophil would have anything other than respect for Rosemarie for her choices; she seems set against the whole "have kids, quickly divorce or break up, then look for your real husband" dynamic that's becoming so popular with western women.

I am a man without children or weight problems. If I restrict myself to similar women, then, yes, the dating pool is a trifle short where I live, even for women 5 years younger than I.

 

[azanon]

My impulse to have sex is much, much weaker than my impulse to form intimate relationships, and sex without intimacy is about as thrilling to me as a trip to the gynecologist.

This is most women. I might go so far as to say it's all women except for those that have mental instability.

The dance you and all women have to play is how much are you going to give, to have the potential for what you really want. My style (and any DJs style) doesn't involve ultimatums or begging/pleading. I would tempt you on every level that matters to you. Not just by being sexually desirable, but I would demonstrate that I have power, money, influence, friends, can provide companionship, will listen to you, and will show interest in you. I also throw in a bit of dangerous/reckless for good measure. I go for shock and awe. I go for disrupting your mental state so much that you tell your mother and your girlfriends about "this guy"!

In short, my style is for a woman to be more than willing to risk sex simply for the possibility of a relationship. If my overall package were not good enough for them to even gamble for that possibility, then I wouldn't be satisfied with "me".

Lets not forget, Rose, that you guys realize that your sex can actually be a powerful coercive tool as well. It's a hell of a lot easier for a man to walk away from a sexless situation, than it is for him to walk away when sex is involved. This is often reason enough to "give it up".

I know..... you'll risk it if it's worth the risk. It's my job for me to ensure that I'm worth it. It's our job here at Sosuave to train men to be worth it; to be exceptional.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

...
I am a man without children or weight problems. If I restrict myself to similar women, then, yes, the dating pool is a trifle short where I live, even for women 5 years younger than I.

I'm in the same boat (stepkids are grown) but add to the mix that I neither want children or help out as a surrogant parent again. I'm searching for a one on one relationship with a fit woman without kids within 5 years of my age. Yep, I need to move to Spain.

 

[Rosemarie]

The dance you and all women have to play is how much are you going to give, to have the potential for what you really want. My style (and any DJs style) doesn't involve ultimatums or begging/pleading. I would tempt you on every level that matters to you. Not just by being sexually desirable, but I would demonstrate that I have power, money, influence, friends, can provide companionship, will listen to you, and will show interest in you. I also throw in a bit of dangerous/reckless for good measure. I go for shock and awe. I go for disrupting your mental state so much that you tell your mother and your girlfriends about "this guy"!

In short, my style is for a woman to be more than willing to risk sex simply for the possibility of a relationship. If my overall package were not good enough for them to even gamble for that possibility, then I wouldn't be satisfied with "me".

I know..... you'll risk it if it's worth the risk. It's my job for me to ensure that I'm worth it. It's our job here at Sosuave to train men to be worth it; to be exceptional.

Sigh...yet another sosuaver who just doesn't get it. Since when do power, money and influence matter in the end? That's superficial crap, something I figured out by about age 14. Nobody, on their deathbed, lies there thinking about this stuff, so why think about it now?

Don't misunderstand me. You have the right to set your own standards and meet them. It's just that nobody else has to participate in this.

 

[Mr.Positive]

Sigh...yet another sosuaver who just doesn't get it. Since when do power, money and influence matter in the end? That's superficial crap, something I figured out by about age 14. Nobody, on their deathbed, lies there thinking about this stuff, so why think about it now?

Don't misunderstand me. You have the right to set your own standards and meet them. It's just that nobody else has to participate in this.

Rosemarie, how is making us better men "not getting it"?

I've found that having high standards for myself, I tend to attract women with high standards too. When I set large goals, and achieve them, people want to be a part of that.

There is always someone who wants to participate.

and another thing, men's sexuality is not a bad thing. Our society pushes that have a strong sex drive makes a man creepy, untrustworthy, "only after his own needs", selfish...I could go on.

My point is that I've learned, for me, sex is important. I'm not going to fight my sex drive. If a woman is interested in me, she understands this. It's not a bad thing to be a sexual person...it's normal. So if you want to hate men for this fine. Fortunately, a lot of woman realize they have strong sex drives too.

There's always someone who wants to participate.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Since when do power, money and influence matter in the end? That's superficial crap, something I figured out by about age 14. Nobody, on their deathbed, lies there thinking about this stuff, so why think about it now?

Ah, the oldest powerplay in existence; the denial that power has legitimacy. You realize of course that this in itself is a grab at power? Delegitimizing power is always an attempt to handicap a more powerful player and adjust the circumstance to the relative skills of the one doing it. Which BTW would be the first thing I'd do if I were asked if power mattered in the long run,...of course not dear,..

 

[Jeffst1980]

I cringed when I read the OP's post, anticipating the onslaught of misogyny that was to follow...

The OP asked for advice on her situation, and it seems a lot of time has been wasted by sosuavers that just want to shame her for past decisions. Sometimes good people get involved with bad people, especially when they're younger. This does not make them "low quality." I applaud the OP's honest intentions and willingness to consider all viewpoints. OF COURSE she is going to put her child first--the child SHOULD come first!!

SouthernGal, it is true that being a single mom shrinks your dating pool; however, it certainly does not mean you are limited to "low quality" men--do not listen to anyone that tells you that! What it means is that you may have to adjust your target market a bit. That 24 year old may be good for a quick fling but entirely unrealistic for a relationship. You are 5 years older than him, and placing him in a position of such responsibility may be asking too much of someone that is barely an adult, even if you aren't "daddy shopping." That said, there are PLENTY of men that WOULD be fine with dating or even marrying a single mom, and that does NOT make them "low quality." If I clicked really well with an attractive single mom and she demonstrated herself to be an amazing, caring mate, I would certainly be willing to look past the fact that she had a child by another man. I would NOT feel like a cuckold. That would be akin to saying that my girlfriend at the moment cheated on me because she had sex with her old boyfriend a year before she met me.

You need to be up front about your situation and expectations to guys that you're dating. DO NOT attempt to "hook" them and then casually drop the fact that you have a child--that WILL make them freak out. Yes, a lot of men will initially run away, but that's the point. You need to filter out the ones that have a problem with this situation. It will be upsetting at first and you may feel undesirable, but understand that this is a necessary evil to achieve what you want. Also be aware of the fact that the more you are accepting of your situation, the more others will be. Keep a positive attitude, socialize when you can, and above all, DON'T get sucked into another unhealthy relationship because you feel that's "all you can get." The whole point of this forum is to show men how to create their own realities, and this applies to you, as well.

Good luck, you sound like a good person, and don't let some of the negative posts here bring you down.

 

[Max Power]

Since when do power, money and influence matter in the end? That's superficial crap, something I figured out by about age 14. .

And at that point, Max Power never read another thing Rosemarie wrote on Sosuave again, realizing she was living on "Planet Losers in Denial."

 

[Latinoman]

Several random thoughts based on the later posts:

1) To Jeffst1980 and his

“I cringed when I read the OP's post, anticipating the onslaught of misogyny that was to follow...The OP asked for advice on her situation, and it seems a lot of time has been wasted by sosuavers that just want to shame her for past decisions. Sometimes good people get involved with bad people, especially when they're younger. This does not make them "low quality." I applaud the OP's honest intentions and willingness to consider all viewpoints. OF COURSE she is going to put her child first--the child SHOULD come first!!

Why every time a man in the mature forum gives honest assessment, he/they are accused of being misogyny? Fact is, a woman with small children options with a “quality” man or a man with options are going to shrink considerably. Of course, there are “nice guys” out there. And if that woman has a good balance (and is VERY hot), she might pull one of those nice guys out. And in some instances, even a DJ. That’s not the point some of us are trying to make. I say Jeffst has a snatch between his legs.

2) To Rosemary: Power, money, and influence does matter at the end for most women. I bet that if Senator x (worth $1 billion dollars) approached you and eventually asked you for a date, you would be all over him. Especially if he was also good looking. I would also bet that if he was kind of an “azz” you would probably overlook that, because his looks, his power and $$$ and status will cloud your eyes. Of course, women that don’t get approached by this kind of men tend to bring the “power, money, and influence does not matter” b.s.. The women that REALLY don’t care about those things are the women that have been approached or are in a situation in which powerful or rich men have approached them.

3) Lot of women with small children happen to find good men in their lives. Especially if that woman is HOT and self-sufficient. But, as I stated early, I am not one of those men. My children are big. I am relatively good looking too. And I am not some fat guy either. Furthermore, career wise I am in a great shape (with room to improve considerably). So, why should I sacrifice myself by investing on ANY woman? It comes down to this: I have options. And as a man with options, I do NOT want to be a male-figure for other man’s children. And I don’t want to be number 2 in any woman’s life (especially if I end up becoming her husband or living with her). A man that becomes part of a single-mother’s life has a responsibility as a MAN to become a masculine example for the children in her life. That’s the way it is.

NOTE: I totally agree with Jophil.

 

[Rosemarie]

Yup, time for me to bow out again. The truth is, I have absolutely nothing to say to the men here. The values are so completely divergent from mine that there's no real basis even for a conversation.

Really, I've been waiting for Ketostix to accuse me of being Wyldfire, but I'll settle for someone else calling me a loser.

OP, good luck to you! When I say there is no lack you can fill in your life to make it better, I don't mean that you're doomed to a life of misery. I'm saying, pretty much, that no matter where you go, there you are and that's all there is to it. What will or won't please or displease men is beside the point. What matters is what you do with the time and resources you have.

There is no formula for a good, happy, fulfilled life.

Becoming a single mother was a profound trauma for me, given how it happened, and I can now safely say that it was also the best thing that ever happened to me. I would give anything to have my sister back, and yet having promised to raise her kids for her if anything happened has given me more joy than anything else I've ever done. I don't live in a world where my sister is alive, so this isn't second-best. It's as good as it gets.

Heaven's inside us. We don't get it by climbing to the top of the corporate ladder. Money can't buy it. Certainly dating, sex and marriage don't get us there. Having children doesn't work, either. Nothing we do can help us reach it, and a lot of stuff we do just takes us farther away.

If we can't see it, or if it seems like we're running in place, there are things that can help. Therapy, in the wake of my sister's death, did me and the kids a world of good. If you have a minister, you might be able to get help there. Some people just walk into a church, temple or Zen center and sit down for a while. There should be something out there that works for you.

One day about a year after my sister died, I picked the kids up after work, went home, had a light supper, and curled up in front of a video with them, and I realized that I was truly happy. My career had been scrambled, my hopes of a family of my own were gone, I was struggling to make ends meet, I was still too tired from work to even read to them yet, and I was happier than I had ever been.

It's gotten nothing but better from there, even though the men here don't approve of me much.

 

[Tpants]

[Tries again revealing age this time]

A friend of a friend married an older woman with a 12-yr-old son, so it CAN happen. We went to visit them and she said within the first five minutes how noble he was to marry her, especially since she could no longer have kids. Clearly she was sensitive about the issue.

He was the classic AFC. A quiet, decent guy, not good-looking, with a steady low-grade job. She was attractive and vivacious with twenty times the vibrancy he had.

I never found out if the marriage worked in the long term. My suspicion was that he was prepared to settle for second best, but she might not have been.

 

[Jeffst1980]

Perhaps 'misogyny' was a poor choice of words on my part. I'm all for honest assessment. In fact, if you go back to my post, you'll see that I agreed with the notion of the shrinking dating pool. However, I draw the line at saying that only an AFC would go for her, or that she had better put the man she's dating before her children if she wants him to stick around. I don't believe either of those to be true, and I don't understand why anyone would try to place such limiting beliefs on a complete stranger that has already been through a lot. We don't tell guys on this site that if they're not good looking and successful they can't get a quality women, we just say it's going to be more challenging. We don't the OP's situation so let's not judge her or condemn her as an "unsuitable mate." If this means I have a snatch between my legs, so be it.

SouthernGal, here's the jist of my post:

It is true that being a single mom shrinks your dating pool; however, it certainly does not mean you are limited to "low quality" men. What it means is that you may have to adjust your target market a bit. That 24 year old may be good for a quick fling but entirely unrealistic for a relationship. You are 5 years older than him, and placing him in a position of such responsibility may be asking too much of someone that is barely an adult, even if you aren't "daddy shopping." That said, there are PLENTY of men that WOULD be fine with dating or even marrying a single mom, and that does NOT make them "low quality."

You need to be up front about your situation and expectations to guys that you're dating. DO NOT attempt to "hook" them and then casually drop the fact that you have a child--that WILL make them freak out. Yes, a lot of men will initially run away, but that's the point. You need to filter out the ones that have a problem with this situation--a lot will, and that's their right, you can't fault them for that. It will be upsetting at first and you may feel undesirable, but understand that this is a necessary evil to achieve what you want. Also be aware of the fact that the more you are accepting of your situation, the more others will be. Keep a positive attitude, socialize when you can, and above all, DON'T get sucked into another unhealthy relationship because you feel that's "all you can get." The whole point of this forum is to show men how to create their own realities, and this applies to you, as well.

 

[##17]

Perhaps 'misogyny' was a poor choice of words on my part. I'm all for honest assessment. In fact, if you go back to my post, you'll see that I agreed with the notion of the shrinking dating pool. However, I draw the line at saying that only an AFC would go for her, or that she had better put the man she's dating before her children if she wants him to stick around.

Actually, I myself want to be first in my woman's life, at least for a time, until she has my kids. I think many quality guys think that way. Just as a woman wants to be first in her MAN's life. Anyway, this is a nearly impossible balancing act for many single moms to pull off. So I'd have to say that I won't date any more single moms.

I don't believe either of those to be true, and I don't understand why anyone would try to place such limiting beliefs on a complete stranger that has already been through a lot.

Are you talking from experience or are you just speaking hypothetically? Are you with a single mom yourself now? (For the record, I have dated a single mom, a wonderful woman, by the way.)

Anyway, SouthernGal asked us for our opinion, we gave it to her.

We don't the OP's situation so let's not judge her or condemn her as an "unsuitable mate." If this means I have a snatch between my legs, so be it.

We don't know anything about the OP as a person. We are not judging her *as a person*. All we know is *her situation*. We do know is that it will make it harder for her to be a in a serious committed relationship with a quality guy, at least until her kids become older. For the reasons given above, and below.

In the meanwhile, if she would benefit from casual noncommitted relationship with good guys work for her, then she should go for it. (I personally advised her to pursue friendship first.) If it does not, then she is free to not do it, or to hold off until her kids get older. And no matter what Rosemary seems to think, she is not expected nor advised by the guys to make herself a 'cvm receptacle'. She is free to hold out (and SHOULD hold out) for a guy she feels friendship for before she has sex with him, on her terms.

Jeff, you seem naive, wet behind the ears. What you don't get is that our male reptillian brains have a taboo towards taking on another man's job and raising his offspring. If a guy does stick around to take on this responsibility, he is making a huge biological sacrifice for the woman's sake. And if the Bad Boy biological dad is still around, the new partner of a single mom is really getting a bad deal: the new partner sacrifices his time and resources to raise Bad Boy's kids (and help pass on Bad Boy's genes) and yet Bad Boy is still the one making the decisions as to how the kids get raised, and is still the one the kids call Dad. The new partner becomes a glorified babysitter. Who would ever accept that?

Even if the biological father isn't still around, there is no guarantee that the mom's kids will accept her new partner as the head of their household, which as politically incorrect as it sounds, is how it needs to be for things to work. A man has to feel in charge of his household, or his masculinity will suffer, which will mean that his wife will lose her attraction for him.

 

[Max Power]

I draw the line at saying that only an AFC would go for her .

Maybe not an AFC, but definitely someone who doesn't have too many options or hasn't tried hard enough (which is similar to an AFC).