Changing dating strategy? Any ideas please?

UKTigerlily

Personally i'd be quite flattered to be called a lady & i'm nearly 38! lol

Smartsaver7

boliston wrote: »

I think this hits the nail on the head - far too many people think of a relationship as the "cake" rather than the "icing"

That depends if you want the whole thing , marriage , kids etc which is quite a large slice of life's cake to many , there are plenty of ways just to get some icing without a whole cake, you could for example go for a bakewell tart

If I could go back in time I would spend more time at the cake shop , rather than on my career , I now am happy to settle for a nice iced bun.:):D

Smartsaver7

UKTigerlily wrote: »

Personally i'd be quite flattered to be called a lady & i'm nearly 38! lol

You're a lady

duchy

boliston wrote: »

Agree with the comment about distance being a problem - for me they would have to be within easy walking distance (I'm not a car owner but I would not want to keep getting in the car just to go on a date)

Dating is like anything else, the more you put into it the more you succeed. If you were looking to improve your prospects and look for a new job would you only apply for jobs within walking distance of home too and drastically limit your possibilities too ?

You are single because you aren't putting in the effort . Either continue with your search in a very limited way or broaden your horizons. You don't need a car , buses and trains work very well if you can be bothered.
Most women however wouldn't bother dating a man who insisted everything they did had to be walking distance of their home. It would imply a very narrow view of life and imply they were quite boring.

indiepanda

Smartsaver7 wrote: »

That depends if you want the whole thing , marriage , kids etc which is quite a large slice of life's cake to many , there are plenty of ways just to get some icing without a whole cake, you could for example go for a bakewell tart

If I could go back in time I would spend more time at the cake shop , rather than on my career , I now am happy to settle for a nice iced bun.:):D

True enough. I always knew that I didn't want children - and though my sister married a man who seemed as happy as her not to have children, I never really expected to meet a guy who also didn't want children but did want marriage. So I guess I subconsciously or otherwise avoided the whole thing.

Gloomendoom

indiepanda wrote: »

True enough. I always knew that I didn't want children - and though my sister married a man who seemed as happy as her not to have children, I never really expected to meet a guy who also didn't want children but did want marriage. So I guess I subconsciously or otherwise avoided the whole thing.

I suppose the chances of meeting a man in later years who doesn't want children is higher.

My wife and I assumed that we would have children when we married but when subsequently discussing the mechanics of when to start trying for a baby, we realised that neither of us actually wanted one.

Smartsaver7

I would have liked the happy family thing, it does hit you sometimes that one will never be there for the birth of a child, see one grow up or have grandchildren, friends and colleagues lives were always alien to me in that respect, at the time you feel how lucky you are having freedom to do what you want but as you get older your feelings change, but it is what it is. Sadly due to medical reasons I now cannot have kids even if I met someone who wanted them.

onomatopoeia99

indiepanda wrote: »

I never really expected to meet a guy who also didn't want children but did want marriage.

I don't find that combination particularly strange, though it doesn't match my own as I've never seen any reason for a complex legal contract (which is ultimately what marriage is) in a committed loving relationship. Possibly I'm overly sentimental, but for me love should be enough.

That said, you might find there are more people that meet your combination of wants than you think.

Smartsaver7

duchy wrote: »

You don't need a car , buses and trains work very well if you can be bothered.
Most women however wouldn't bother dating a man who insisted everything they did had to be walking distance of their home. It would imply a very narrow view of life and imply they were quite boring.

It all depends where you live, if you both live in a city like London no you don't need a car , if you live somewhere rural where there is no public transport after 7pm or at weekends like I do one does need a car unless one can afford a taxi everywhere. When I was using dating sites most meets were quite a distance and in locations not near a station , jumping on a bike also not an option mainly as I haven't got one.
Nearly all of my dates required both of us to drive to the RVP and we usually met half way.

Smartsaver7

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

I don't find that combination particularly strange, though it doesn't match my own as I've never seen any reason for a complex legal contract (which is ultimately what marriage is) in a committed loving relationship. Possibly I'm overly sentimental, but for me love should be enough.

That said, you might find there are more people that meet your combination of wants than you think.

I agree , previously you were somewhat protected if you were married financially if one split up , the law has changed on that with non married partners having rights , there are some benefits in some professions re pensions etc that may persuade some and of course the religious aspect.:A If I am ever lucky enough to meet someone and she wanted to get married down the line I wouldn't have a problem as long as a registry office.

As for finding someone to marry who doesn't want kids that gets easier as you get older.:)