Mr. Right versus Mr. Right Now

[Xantippe]

I’m not sure where anyone got “man-hating” out of this piece. The author spoke primarily about herself and didn’t extrapolate her experience. And as she said several times, she’s happily married, presumably, to a man.

That said, she sounds very childish. If getting married is a real priority to you (and who would want to be married to someone who didn’t prioritize it?), then be ready before 32. There’s a lot of time between 19 and 32! No, I don’t think anyone outside of the military should marry between say, 18-22, for practical reasons as well as maturity. But by 25, if that’s something you want, you need to be actively working on making yourself ‘marriagable’ AND putting yourself out there and meeting people.

19 and stupid vs 38 and infertile may have been her choice, but it doesn’t have to be anyone else’s.

I think DCM has probably dated more than anybody on this forum–she had and has a HUGE social life.

She says of what made her unmarriageable as a younger woman:

“It’s sad that I was functionally unmarriageable until I was 32, and this was not because of any bad habit or addiction or obvious vice. Looking dispassionately upon my 25 year old self (poor girl) from a distance of twenty years, 3,371 miles and the comfort of a good marriage, I think the problem stemmed from irrational fear, depression, confusion and, above all, not being rooted in reality, especially the reality of how other people think and feel and get what they want. How much of this was my fault and how much was chemical or anatomical (e.g. unusually slow transition from child brain to adult brain) may be explained to me on Judgement Day.”

(25 was I believe when she married the first Mr. DCM–the abusive whackaloon and I believe 32 puts her 5 years out from having left the first Mr. DCM–not that long to get over a full-immersion abusive relationship, I think.)

Edited to add: Reading DCM’s story of her first marriage, it reminds me a lot of the older guy I dated when I was 19 and who wanted to marry me. The particular details are different, but I feel like I would have been in a very similar mental space to where DCM was at 25–I just didn’t have a lot of street smarts then and there were a lot of things that were obvious lines that I didn’t realize were lines at the time, because I was 19 and didn’t have a lot of street smarts.

 

[Xantippe]

I agree entirely with this.

I think part of the reason my husband and I were ready is that we both came from stable homes with stable marriages, and almost all of our friends and family were also from stable homes with stable marriages. That’s not to say our home lives were perfect at all, or even that there weren’t some really problematic things going on, but we had a lot more advantages than many people when it came to dating and discerning marriage, even if we didn’t know it at the time.

Having to figure out all that stuff on your own is very difficult.

Yeah. I have made so many mistakes over the years and my husband has made so many mistakes, and yet it doesn’t really matter, because none of them was a fatal mistake, we are both people of good will, and we have the bedrock of both being from families that aren’t perfect, but that do seem to have the lifelong marriage thing figured out. My parents are coming up on their 47th anniversary, my grandparents celebrated their 70th anniversary this year and I believe my in-laws have been married about 45 years now.

 

[Xantippe]

As of now, I would prefer to play a single game of Russian Roulette using a revolver with 5 chambers. My odds and outcomes would be better. If I lose it is quick and painless. If I stayed married, my reward would be to run the same risks next year, and the year after that, and so on.I have absolutely no intention of getting married for at least another 10 years or so. By that time however, I guarantee that I will have better options than a woman who is my age and unable to have children.

I think that the math doesn’t work on the Russian roulette example you give. Your example suggests that 20% of existing marriages explode every year, which is not the case at all. That’s much closer to the lifetime than the yearly number.

Interestingly, age gaps are associated with higher divorce rates, so all things being equal, a woman close to you in age is a better risk, if you are very worried about that sort of thing. Here are some stats:

theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/11/why-to-marry-someone-your-own-age/382520/

A five year age gap makes divorce 18% more likely, a 10 year gap makes it 39% more likely, etc. It gets worse and worse the bigger the gap is.

Interestingly, in terms of minimizing divorce, there’s also a sweet spot for age at marriage:

goodhousekeeping.com/life/relationships/a33524/best-age-to-marry-to-avoid-divorce/

“So what is the perfect age to get married if you want a lasting union? According to the study, it’s between the ages of 25 and 32. And that takes into account social and demographic factors like sex, race, family structure, religion, sexual history, and size of metropolitan area. “For almost everyone, the late 20s seems to be the best time to tie the knot,” wrote Wolfinger.”

“Although Wolfinger admits it’s “all conjecture,” he does have a theory why thirty-somethings have a harder time staying married. First, he believes the kinds of people who wait until their mid-30s to wed may not be predisposed to marriage, whether from difficult personalities or trouble with interpersonal relationships, and consequently are also at a high risk of divorce.”

So, the current medians for age at first marriage in the US (27 for women and 29 for men) do seem to be just about right in terms of long term marital success.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I think that the math doesn’t work on the Russian roulette example you give. Your example suggests that 20% of existing marriages explode every year, which is not the case at all. That’s much closer to the lifetime than the yearly number.

Interestingly, age gaps are associated with higher divorce rates, so all things being equal, a woman close to you in age is a better risk, if you are very worried about that sort of thing. Here are some stats:

theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/11/why-to-marry-someone-your-own-age/382520/

A five year age gap makes divorce 18% more likely, a 10 year gap makes it 39% more likely, etc. It gets worse and worse the bigger the gap is.

Interestingly, in terms of minimizing divorce, there’s also a sweet spot for age at marriage:

goodhousekeeping.com/life/relationships/a33524/best-age-to-marry-to-avoid-divorce/

“So what is the perfect age to get married if you want a lasting union? According to the study, it’s between the ages of 25 and 32. And that takes into account social and demographic factors like sex, race, family structure, religion, sexual history, and size of metropolitan area. “For almost everyone, the late 20s seems to be the best time to tie the knot,” wrote Wolfinger.”

“Although Wolfinger admits it’s “all conjecture,” he does have a theory why thirty-somethings have a harder time staying married. First, he believes the kinds of people who wait until their mid-30s to wed may not be predisposed to marriage, whether from difficult personalities or trouble with interpersonal relationships, and consequently are also at a high risk of divorce.”

So, the current medians for age at first marriage in the US (27 for women and 29 for men) do seem to be just about right in terms of long term marital success.

It’s moot anyway. The number of older men who can actually get and keep attractive younger women is much smaller than those who think they can. Most men who try consistently come off as creeps.

More than looks or money (though those things are important), it comes down to charm. I have a hard time imagining the guy who wrote the rant you quoted as being particularly charming.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

If she ovulated for the last time at age 38, then she experienced menopause at a remarkable early age. Few women go through menopause before age 45 and the average age of menopause is around 51. (That’s according to a quick web search–no medical advice intended.) That may have been her experience, but it does not reflect the reality for most women.

Apparently the author matured very late emotionally while her reproductive parts were simultaneously aging very quickly.

Agree about that being pretty young for menopause.

All my kids were born in my 30’s. My youngest I was almost 40.

I thought that the phrase “Mr Right vs. Mr. Right Now” meant that Mr. Right was the one you married, Mr. Right Now, is the fellow you date because you don’t want to necessarily go home to an empty apartment. And I thought it was a secular concept.

I think all this depends.

It’s fine to wait to get married. My DH’s cousin is 45 and getting married for the first time.

It’s fine to get married on the younger side.

Being 45 doesn’t guarantee maturity.

Being 20 doesn’t mean being immature.

 

[Xantippe]

Agree about that being pretty young for menopause.

All my kids were born in my 30’s. My youngest I was almost 40.

**I thought that the phrase “Mr Right vs. Mr. Right Now” meant that Mr. Right was the one you married, Mr. Right Now, **is the fellow you date because you don’t want to necessarily go home to an empty apartment. And I thought it was a secular concept.

I think all this depends.

It’s fine to wait to get married. My DH’s cousin is 45 and getting married for the first time.

It’s fine to get married on the younger side.

Being 45 doesn’t guarantee maturity.

Being 20 doesn’t mean being immature.

I wanted some quick short hand for the issues in the piece, but I probably should have just used her post title: “Right Man vs Chances of Having Kids Paradox.”

I think what I would like our young readers to get from the piece and thread is that there’s no time where you look at your watch and say, “Uh oh, It’s 25-o’clock/30-o’clock! I need to marry my current gentleman/lady friend!”

One’s age does not make one obligated to get married to any particular person, if one doesn’t feel enthusiastic about the idea.

For example, Starshiptrooper feels deeply unenthusiastic about marriage, which suggests that Starshiptrooper should not get married right now.

The presence of enthusiasm does not mean that it’s a good match, but I think the absence of enthusiasm is a very bad sign.

 

[mikeeh]

If she ovulated for the last time at age 38, then she experienced menopause at a remarkable early age. Few women go through menopause before age 45 and the average age of menopause is around 51. (That’s according to a quick web search–no medical advice intended.) That may have been her experience, but it does not reflect the reality for most women.

Apparently the author matured very late emotionally while her reproductive parts were simultaneously aging very quickly.

Actually, women’s fertility is far more complex than that. Here’s just a little information on how rough it can be. The fertile peak for women is in their early 20s. Fertility starts to decline in their late 20s and speeds up in their mid-30s. A recent study came out saying that if a woman wants at least 3 children, she has to start having them by age 23. if she wants one she has to start by age 35. One issue is there is one a certain number of eggs and women lose about 90 percent of them by age 30. Then there is timing. People think getting pregnant is easy, but it can be very difficult since actual ovulation on last about 12 hours. And you have to assume the man’s sperm is healthy. There are some studies that indicate if a woman has had a baby before it will be easier to conceive the next time. In other words, if you keep the uterus active it will stay active, but that too is only temporary when menopause comes around.

 

[Sarcelle]

Actually, women’s fertility is far more complex than that. Here’s just a little information on how rough it can be. The fertile peak for women is in their early 20s. Fertility starts to decline in their late 20s and speeds up in their mid-30s. A recent study came out saying that if a woman wants at least 3 children, she has to start having them by age 23. if she wants one she has to start by age 35. One issue is there is one a certain number of eggs and women lose about 90 percent of them by age 30. Then there is timing. People think getting pregnant is easy, but it can be very difficult since actual ovulation on last about 12 hours. And you have to assume the man’s sperm is healthy. There are some studies that indicate if a woman has had a baby before it will be easier to conceive the next time. In other words, if you keep the uterus active it will stay active, but that too is only temporary when menopause comes around.

Both my grandmothers had their first baby at 20 and their last baby at 50.

Yes, 50.

All of their children were healthy including the youngest ones. No birth defects.

 

[mikeeh]

Both my grandmothers had their first baby at 20 and their last baby at 50.

Yes, 50.

All of their children were healthy including the youngest ones. No birth defects.

That’s cool. I had a friend with a hereditary condition that caused her ovaries to age faster than the rest of her body, so she was in her late 30s with menopausal ovaries. I guess genetics can really shape someones fertility.

 

[mikeeh]

Here’s a really good piece by my hero Dorothy Cummings McLean, talking about the potential conflict between young marriage with children and marrying the right person.

thehistoricalhouse.blogspot.com/2016/09/right-man-vs-chances-of-having-kids.html#comment-form

It’s all very good, but I’ll pull out a couple of quotes:

"However, the problem is—and I wonder if this is an insurmountable problem—finding a man with whom you honestly think you could spend the rest of your life (and who honestly wants to spend the rest of his life with you) when you are still on the young side of marriageable age.

“What marriageable age is, is a whole other–but related–question. Although outwardly I must have seemed marriageable at 19, inwardly I just didn’t have the necessary personality until I was 32 or so.”

"Nevertheless, it is difficult not to look backwards [at her own life] and see a stark choice:

"A. Marry young, have children, be bored and embarrassed (or abused and ground down) by husband, become shrew or worse.

“B. Marry truly splendid chap after, apparently, fertility has packed it in.”

(DCM married in her mid-20s, had an abusive marriage, divorced and got an annulment, and then was single until her later 30s. She and her current husband had a whirlwind romance and got married when she was 38. It’s some years later now, and it looks like they will be unable to have children.)

I like to tell people there are 7 billion people on this planet. We all can’t be the same. Some people get it right the first time. Others will find it later on. For those who find it later, they must still be an example of a good Catholic.

 

[on_the_hill]

Looking back at your own life, do you think that you would have been well-served at 22 by just taking the first single woman who agreed to marry you?

Or would that have been a mistake?

I.

Wheeeew. That would’ve been a huge mistake. Wow. Scary to think about that one.

My wife has always held that there is no single right person, and waiting for that person is why so many women remain single when they don’t want to. She’s more of a believer in “right person at rhe right time.”

 

[on_the_hill]

I think Advanced Maternal Age starts at 35

 

[Xantippe]

Wheeeew. That would’ve been a huge mistake. Wow. Scary to think about that one.

My wife has always held that there is no single right person, and waiting for that person is why so many women remain single when they don’t want to. She’s more of a believer in “right person at rhe right time.”

I’ve started to feel strongly that there are a lot of “right people” for certain individuals, but that for others, there might only be one, or nobody at all.

I know I often look at friends’ or relatives’ husbands and think–if he were my husband, I’d be in the loony bin (best case scenario)–but they seem to get on fine with each other!

I expect some people feel the same way about my husband or about me.

I was talking about this stuff elsewhere and here was a thought I had that is consistent with DCM (I think):

1. I don’t think that people ought to marry without enthusiasm for their intended. It shouldn’t be “meh, I’m getting married.” If you don’t love the person with all your heart, don’t waste everybody’s time. Collect stamps or build model airplanes instead.
2. But at the same time, the heart is not infallible. A red light (lack of enthusiasm) definitely means stop, but a green light (PASSION) does not necessarily mean go. Check the intersection for oncoming traffic.

If that makes any sense?

 

[Sarcelle]

I guess a lot of women hear the biological clocks getting louder and panic when there is no prospective husband on the horizon.

I was told I would not have the ability to have children when I was a teen so the passage of time never bothered me. Can’t mourn losing what I never had in the first place.

 

[gardenswithkids]

…I think what I would like our young readers to get from the piece and thread is that there’s no time where you look at your watch and say, “Uh oh, It’s 25-o’clock/30-o’clock! I need to marry my current gentleman/lady friend!”…

Interesting. I certainly didn’t pick that up as being your point. In fact, I wonder if it may cause some women to fear that if they want children, then need to settle.

If the choices really were as restricted as that article seemed to present (abusive marriage at 19 with children vs. good man when past child-bearing years) then some women may chose marriage at 19. Some women may desire children more than they desire a good marriage. Let me just say, that I always wanted children. I also wanted a good marriage to a good man who would be a good father.

Women shouldn’t think that they can only have either children or a good husband. We have more choices than that.

 

[Xantippe]

Interesting. I certainly didn’t pick that up as being your point. In fact, I wonder if it may cause some women to fear that if they want children, then need to settle.

If the choices really were as restricted as that article seemed to present (abusive marriage at 19 with children vs. good man when past child-bearing years) then some women may chose marriage at 19. Some women may desire children more than they desire a good marriage. Let me just say, that I always wanted children. I also wanted a good marriage to a good man who would be a good father.

Women shouldn’t think that they can only have either children or a good husband. We have more choices than that.

She was 25 when she got married the first time.

I was the one with the bad news older boyfriend at 19. So delighted I didn’t marry him (even though I could have)!

 

[ThePCWife]

Statistically, most women’s baby factories shut down around 40, give or take a couple years on either side (so the 38yo OP was within normal ranges and not an outlier at all). If you have been getting pregnant frequently since your late teens or early 20s (a very small group of women these days), your body might extend things out to 45 or so.

But all the stories of your aunt’s cousin’s friend who had her first/eighth/third kid at 50 won’t make women’s fertility flexible and easy where they can just snap their fingers and have a pregnancy with a term baby whenever and however old they are. Babies come by God’s will and He’s directed biology to work a certain way so that conceptions leading to term babies are rare after about age 40. Not impossible, just not common and very much not to be counted on.

And that’s not counting the issue of raising infant/toddler kids when you’re old enough to be gramma but you’re mamma instead.

I married in my late 20s thinking I was infertile. I was blessed with a very statistically improbable level of fertility. I do not ever normalize my fertility because I think it is wrong to give false hope to women of a certain age and health circumstance.

Marriage when you’re young is a tough call. In my case my options when I was young and twenty were mostly guys from divorced parent backgrounds. In my mid20s it was guys from stabler backgrounds with parents who had long marriages like my own parents. So I married one of those. But I certainly thought I had to give up the hope of children for companionship in old age. It’s not so unusual anymore.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Statistically, most women’s baby factories shut down around 40, give or take a couple years on either side (so the 38yo OP was within normal ranges and not an outlier at all). If you have been getting pregnant frequently since your late teens or early 20s (a very small group of women these days), your body might extend things out to 45 or so.

But all the stories of your aunt’s cousin’s friend who had her first/eighth/third kid at 50 won’t make women’s fertility flexible and easy where they can just snap their fingers and have a pregnancy with a term baby whenever and however old they are. Babies come by God’s will and He’s directed biology to work a certain way so that conceptions leading to term babies are rare after about age 40. Not impossible, just not common and very much not to be counted on.

And that’s not counting the issue of raising infant/toddler kids when you’re old enough to be gramma but you’re mamma instead.

I married in my late 20s thinking I was infertile. I was blessed with a very statistically improbable level of fertility. I do not ever normalize my fertility because I think it is wrong to give false hope to women of a certain age and health circumstance.

Marriage when you’re young is a tough call. In my case my options when I was young and twenty were mostly guys from divorced parent backgrounds. In my mid20s it was guys from stabler backgrounds with parents who had long marriages like my own parents. So I married one of those. But I certainly thought I had to give up the hope of children for companionship in old age. It’s not so unusual anymore.

Reduced fertility at 40 isn;t the same as full blown menopause at 38 though. That being the case the woman in the OP probably had fertility issues before that.

I’m 47. I’m probably not very fertile, but I haven;t reached menopause yet.

 

[starshiptrooper]

I think that the math doesn’t work on the Russian roulette example you give. Your example suggests that 20% of existing marriages explode every year, which is not the case at all. That’s much closer to the lifetime than the yearly number.

Not necessarily. Even if the 50% divorce rate is lifetime rather than yearly, a single marriage would still be comparable to a game of Russian Roulette. This of course presumes that I would enter into a contract that is both socially and legally unfavorable to men qua men.

Interestingly, age gaps are associated with higher divorce rates, so all things being equal, a woman close to you in age is a better risk, if you are very worried about that sort of thing. So, the current medians for age at first marriage in the US (27 for women and 29 for men) do seem to be just about right in terms of long term marital success.

So given that women initiate 70% of all divorces and have both plenty of incentives and few disincentives to do so, why would the odds of divorce be lower given those 2 variables of a somewhat older couple close in age?

The correct answer is because it will be difficult for the woman to obtain a new partner better than or even equal to her current one. That would entail finding a guy who is both successful, not taken to the cleaners in a previous divorce, and have no better options than a woman his own age. Very unlikely. There is a reason that male celebrities and other powerful men are seen in public with women 15 years younger than them while Betty White is not dating Michael Phelps.

 

[Xantippe]

Not necessarily. Even if the 50% divorce rate is lifetime rather than yearly, a single marriage would still be comparable to a game of Russian Roulette. This of course presumes that I would enter into a contract that is both socially and legally unfavorable to men qua men.So given that women initiate 70% of all divorces and have both plenty of incentives and few disincentives to do so, why would the odds of divorce be lower given those 2 variables of a somewhat older couple close in age?

**The correct answer is because it will be difficult for the woman to obtain a new partner better than or even equal to her current one. ** That would entail finding a guy who is both successful, not taken to the cleaners in a previous divorce, and have no better options than a woman his own age. Very unlikely. There is a reason that male celebrities and other powerful men are seen in public with women 15 years younger than them while Betty White is not dating Michael Phelps.

1. The 50% divorce rate is pure mythology.

huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/02/divorce-rate-declining-_n_6256956.html

“In fact, a new piece in the New York Times’ data blog Upshot suggests that the divorce rate has actually been dropping for some time now. Looking at the numbers, the Times suggests the high divorce rate of the late 1970s and early 1980s may have just been a “historical anomaly,” rather than a trend.”

1. Also, as we’ve discussed previously, demographics matter a lot with regard to divorce in the US–education, income, age, the age gap between the spouses, religious affiliation and degree of practice, time dating before proposal, length of engagement, it being a second or third marriage–they all have effects on the divorce rate.
2. Divorce is expensive and frequently causes bankruptcy. Child support is small in comparison to normal middle class expenses. Children are expensive to raise. Married mothers typically make a lot less money than married fathers or childless women. Hence, single motherhood in the US typically means poverty, especially when there are multiple children.

There are huge incentives to make the best of one’s marriage if one is a middle class woman with children that one cares about (and bear in mind that doing the Best Thing for one’s children is pretty much a religion in the middle class in the US).

I suggest reading this:

thepracticalconservative.wordpress.com/real-divorce-information/

1. I can’t say for sure why close age is better for marital longevity, but here are some possibilities: a more shared outlook on life, more closely matched goals (for example, they both want 2.0 kids and a house starting now), similar level of maturity, similar energy level, more compatible friend groups, etc.

Any feature that reduces conflict (for example shared religious views or shared financial goals) is going to improve marital outcomes.

1. I would caution you about the 70% figure. Filing divorce may or may not have anything to do with guilt for causing the divorce. If there are children that needed to be cared for and the husband has stopped financially supporting the family within marriage (which happens), divorce with child support may be chosen as a legal avenue for getting financial support for the children.
2. The hypergamy stuff is stupid and doesn’t really reflect middle class life.

I don’t think that the only thing keeping my 90-year-old grandma with my 94-year-old grandpa is that Michael Phelps isn’t answering her phone calls…

(For the record, Michael Phelps is a really weird looking guy. Not my cup of tea.)

I’m a 41-year-old woman. I’ve been washing my husband’s socks for the last 18 years. I have a pretty good idea from listening to other women talk about their husbands that the grass isn’t any greener over there.

I have absolutely no desire to go chasing men. It sounds exhausting, and then you wind up washing socks again anyway.

No thanks!

I’ve been in online discussions with women my own age, and a common point of view (which I basically share) is that if our husband were to die, we wouldn’t seek remarriage, because a husband is a lot of work, and marrying again just means starting the whole process of negotiating life together from the beginning.

Again, no thanks!

Morals aside, when you feel like you have things more or less figured out and going smoothly, it just sounds dumb to rip that up and start all over again.