Posted on 12/22/2005 8:37:43 AM PST by Sonny M
DEAR ABBY: Several of my friends and I were bemoaning our status as single women in our late 20s/early 30s, and discussing an article we had read in The New York Times about how smart women are less likely to get married. We'd all like to find Mr. Wonderful and be married. But if we have to curtail our professional success, financial wherewithal and IQ to do it, how can a person even begin to do such a thing?
I have a feeling you'll say to be ourselves and it will all work out, but thus far it has NOT worked out, and we're starting to worry. Personally, I think we'd be better off to take jobs as "administrators" in a large company somewhere and hope for the best.
Help, Abby! What's the answer for smart, fun women who have their acts together? How can we best poise ourselves to find true love while being true to ourselves? -- LOSING FAITH IN FINDING MR. RIGHT
DEAR LOSING FAITH: The truth is, there are no guarantees that ANYONE (male or female) will land a mate. It isn't easy these days because people are commitment-phobic. And this applies to individuals at all economic and educational levels, not just you at the top. Pairing off is often a matter of luck and timing -- being in the right place at the right time.
Eligible members of both sexes can be found in places of common interest -- places that are intellectually rewarding, culturally stimulating, athletically challenging or financially advantageous. As to whether you should downgrade your job level in order to appear less "threatening," I guarantee that if you don't take financial care of yourselves while you can, you will regret it later. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, you could fool some of the bachelors some of the time, but you couldn't fool all of them all of the time.
There are worse things than not finding Prince Charming, and one of them is spending your life pretending to be something you're not. So my advice is to stop reading defeatist newspaper and magazine articles. They'll only make you desperate, clingy and depressed -- and none of those traits is attractive to either sex.
DEAR ABBY: My husband and I recently had a baby. We chose a mature, Christian couple to be our child's godparents. However, my brother-in-law is infuriated over the fact that he's not the godparent. He has disowned my husband and wants nothing to do with us. Behavior such as this in the past is part of the reason he wasn't chosen. However, I need to know this: Did we have an obligation to choose him as a godparent? How should we handle his immaturity and controlling behavior? -- NEEDS TO KNOW IN OHIO
DEAR NEEDS TO KNOW: A godparent can either be a relative or a close friend, and you were not obligated to choose one over the other. Your brother-in-law may be hurt that he wasn't chosen, but his subsequent behavior has been so childish that it's apparent you made the right decision. The way to handle his immature and controlling behavior is to forgive him for it, and go on with your lives.
CONFIDENTIAL TO EDWARD PHILLIPS IN MINNEAPOLIS: Happy Birthday, baby brother! I hope you're enjoying your special day.
I was quite ill in my late twenties and the subsequent surgery left me sterile. It was a heartbreak without description, but I got on with my life. I took the advice that children, or the inability to have them couldn't be the centerpiece of my life.
Finding life had to be.
Yes, I wanted kids, and I fostered for a while after my husband died. But I also came to realize, in the midst of fostering that those kids needed someone better than I as a parent...and two adults who were there for them. So now I have my animals.
I also know that I, barren, short-legged, broad hipped, age-d old crone me...I as a person and a woman still have great value and a great deal to offer, the right man who can see it.
I am more than the sum of my parts, missing or otherwise. All people are.
Again,
I see you shopping for a refrigerator. Not a person, but someone who will give you what you want via their body. A brood mare that you know you'll love because she's fertile!
But what would you do if 6 months into your marriage, the same think happens to her that happened to me?
I get the distinct impression she'd be kicked to the curb in a heartbeat.
You want a woman who will adore YOUR present child while you've already admitted that you would not be able to love a previous child of hers (like it deserves).
Think about it.
I stand by shallow.
Not one bit different....
I missed his post.
Thanks for pointing it out! He's an equally shallow twerp.
I'll go slap him silly too. :)
You're a guy...many men don't do soulmates,
They shop for refrigerators.
I've had soulmates...there the person that from the first day, you can be yourself with. That is something you rarely, if ever can grow into.
They ARE
not there. (Dang, I'm getting tired).
Even in my divorce(s), I never fought as much as y'all are doing on this thread.
;-)
(Yes, I'm a DIVORCED WOMAN. ohmylawdies!)
[And yes, reading his stuff is depressing
Why?]
John, you KNOW why. It is biology. The biggest emotion for a woman is fear of abandonment, and the media has given too many in your generation the false concept that same-age males have always been "with them" so that "leaving them" is abandonment. Too many American movies like "Peggy Sue Got Married" make it seem that men just have to "get through their midlife crisis and it will be fine".
The movie "American Beauty" was sick, especially in the way they chose a 17 year old whom the "man with the midlife crisis" could turn away instead of a 19 year old whom he wouldn't have turned away. That movie was ultimately about avoidance of the issue. And it won the Academy Award for avoiding the issue. Watching that piece of trash get the Academy Award was watching the ultimate in liberal nihilism.
The movie "Beautiful Girls" was bizarre in the same way. If the girl in the skating rink had been 18 instead of 15 the storyline would have been more real. Avoidance of the issue is all you get in American culture. And remember "Ethan Fromme" was punished via paralysis from the neck down for his interest in dating younger. This particular resentment of Edith Wharton shows that the resentment of older women toward men dating younger women came as a foundation in American culture. Note how Edith Wharton had the young woman in "Ethan Fromme" paralyzed from the neck down as well.
When you date, you are going to want to save yourself some time by finding out if the woman respects the word "feminism." If she does, fine for her. Move on. You can work with her, vote for Bush with her, but you are probably not going to be marrying her.
You will find that some younger women will completely agree with you that there needs to be an age difference. Go with those who agree with you and, thus, have more in common with you.
Meanwhile, we need a new media in the USA.
Hun,
Mine all died,
maybe I'm making up for lost fight time ;)
OK,
so basically you're saying any woman over 40 should just go kill herself ;)
It's rude to continue to talk about me, and my marriage, without the courtesy of pinging me. So I ask you, since I closed the door on being very interested in continued conversation, to not continue to use me as any kind of example. I am unique, my situation is unique and I am not a 'type' to be generalized about.
But while I'm here, you continue to mischaraterize ~what~ strikes many of us as shallow or creepy. It is not your desire to have kids. Many people have that desire.
For me, it was this idea you posted above that if you found this young thing to marry and she turned out to be barren you would annull the marriage or be doomed to a life of resenting her. You assume you would have some grounds of trickery to use in gaining this annulment, though I'm not sure how you think this young virginal bride would possibly know she could not conceive. So, those of us who read that might think that's pretty shallow on your part.
You also say that if you met a woman who already had children you would simply resent those children. That's repugnant, and shallow and you apparently say it without an ounce of guilt while posting that you want this woman to love yours as her own. Clearly you know most women to be better hearts than yourself.
Again... it's not wrong to want children, but you act like it's a moral imperative that might not have to be adjusted for the fact that you are now no longer 30 yourself. You have a child, so you have not been robbed of children.... or perhaps she doesn't count because she's just a girl and won't carry your name beyond her husband.
You're right. I don't share the importance of you being able to carry your 'line' forward like you are a prize racehorse. The traffic on the freeway yesterday sure indicated to me that mankind has indeed" gone forth and multiplied"
It's specific statements that a few of us find repugnant, not the overall 'desire to have children'. And it's OK to be repugnant, I suppose, if you can find a woman to agree.
Your wife's story was very sad indeed... I'm guess I'm just stunned that after all that, you didn't find anything deeper than one line of Genesis to go forward with.
I love you :)---
In the most non sexual, gee I wish I had said that, I wish I had your decorum kinda way.
I'm sorry for your loss. But I praise God that you've overcome it.
I also know that I, barren, short-legged, broad hipped, age-d old crone me...I as a person and a woman still have great value and a great deal to offer, the right man who can see it.
I am more than the sum of my parts, missing or otherwise. All people are.
And I agree with you.
But what would you do if 6 months into your marriage, the same think happens to her that happened to me?
Then I would love her and treasure her as my wife and the love of my life. God would have given her to me and God would know what he's doing. When I say "I Do" I mean it. Till death do us part. Marriage is for keeps
You want a woman who will adore YOUR present child while you've already admitted that you would not be able to love a previous child of hers (like it deserves).
I agree with you here. But I've been praying that God will make me to be who she can love unreservedly. If she has children then God will have to change me so that I can love them as I love my own. (If I still couldn't at that point I would not marry. I won't do that to a child) So perhaps on this one point I am somewhat shallow. But I won't be shallow when the right time comes.
(I know this is a two way street. I can't expect her to be in shape without being in shape myself etc.)
Can I watch? :^)
~Smiles~
BTW... I'm not at all against the idea that two people of different ages and backgrounds will find terrific love and life together. I have two very good friends who are 20 years apart. But they fell in love despite their age difference, they didn't seek it out to carry on youthful dreams they couldn't let go of. Neither of them thought at the time they wanted more kids, he had already raised three and she was infertile.
And in fact... they decided many years into the marriage to adopt a child.
Lots of kinds of arrangements can work if people work it.
I hold that they are both. There is that something special from the start but you continually grow closer. Michele was my soul-mate. Note that a person can have more than one. Just one at a time
[(I know this is a two way street. I can't expect her to be in shape without being in shape myself etc.)]
You better believe it. You may need a complete wardrobe makeover...the whole works.
I think an important element that most men on this thread missed, is that it sounded like they were saying that women over 40 could just disappear off the face of the Earth for all they cared. But the implication was really that there are plenty of 50 year old men and 60 year old men who would love a younger woman to fall in love with them.
If a 45 year old woman feels "55 year old men can all drop dead for all I care"...then there's a problem. :-0
I've got a network of friends and church ladies 'hunting' for prospective wives for me already. Got a few who seem to be good matches so far. (Christian, never married, 32 or so) Now we just have to correspond for a while and see if we fit before we meet.
you are going to want to save yourself some time by finding out if the woman respects the word "feminism." If she does, fine for her. Move on. You can work with her, vote for Bush with her, but you are probably not going to be marrying her.
Feminism is a word that should not be mentioned in polite company. If she is a feminist she is not a conservative Christian woman.
You will find that some younger women will completely agree with you that there needs to be an age difference. Go with those who agree with you and, thus, have more in common with you.
Yep. Got to have common values, goals and dreams. otherwise it just wont work.
Meanwhile, we need a new media in the USA.
Amen
God Bless you and have a very Merry Christmas
No, only so-called smart, single women that espouse liberal crap and whine about why the world isn't revolving around them despair finding true love.
I agree that you can have more than one (I've had 2, exactly 20 years apart).
I believe you get closer, but there has to be that lock-in from the start. Like with my first hubby and I...folks used to say we were so much alike it was scary. A soulmate truly knows you, even things that you don't know about yourself.
I've also seen couples who are divorcing after 30 years of marriage because they aren't one bit closer on day 10000 of marriage than they were on day 1. You can grow compatable, even love each other, but soulmates is something way different.
It's there or it ain't.
Personally, I won't settle for less, or think it can be made better, or that soulmates are not important. I did once, and it was the biggest mistake of my life.
We're not fighting bannie. We haven't even started SCREAMING at each other yet!!!! :^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.