If you haven’t done it by 50 you never will.

But hideous men with even worse personalities manage to find partners all the time. A lot of women aren’t that picky and can’t afford to be that picky.

What's my source? Are you joking here or what.
Are you trying to tell me that women are attracted to men that they find to be ugly, broke, uncharismatic losers?!
I use the word exceptional here to differentiate from the norm.

And yes things like good looks, wealth, charisma, success ARE superficial (as in visible).

Now when you meet somebody for the first time then it is, by definition, superficial qualities that attract you to them and cause you to want you to interact with and get to know them at a deeper level in the first place!

If you do not interact with them on a deeper level there is no relationship to be had!
Then, if you're lucky, they may turn out to be great people. Or not.

Jeez. This is just obvious.

A lot of the older dads I’ve met had older kids and this was a second marriage. Your stats are for first time dads. But the discussion was whether a man in his 50s who is not “exceptional” could meet a woman in his 50s to have kids with and the answer is clearly yes.

Plus it’s also the case that fewer than 5% of people earn more than 100k a year, yet probably about 50% of my social circle does. It depends on what circles you move in and same with the older dads thing.

Less than 1% of men become first time fathers past the age of 50.
3 in 1000 for over 55 years.

The idea that there are all these men becoming dads for the first time past 50 is clearly not true.

No I have not met any men who became fathers for the first time over the age of 50.
This may be because less than 1% of men become fathers for the first time past 50.

3 in 1000 for those past 55.

So it could be an issue he has not to come to terms with

or

He gets to know them fully and at that point realises they aren’t actually compatible long term.

Either / or.

To be clear I am not saying there can never be an underlying issue.

I am simply challenging the assertion that above a certain age there absolutely must be an issue.

Didn't one of the 'single from luck' people here post that her father was a narcissistic abuser?

I think you possibly made that up.

Do you mean me? I’m not single by the way, I’m in a relationship so I’m not sure how that affects your theory. How do you mean that it was a coincidence? Yes my dad was abusive. No, I don’t think anyone who is not in a couple has “issues” that they need to deal with.

"I don’t think she said her DB has said he has issues. He just said he has not met the right person."

Yes, he has. He has admitted that something happens at a certain point when the relationship starts to feel serious where he seems to 'go off them'. He knows there's a pattern there and that it's not random.

Didn't one of the 'single from luck' people here post that her father was a narcissistic abuser? That was obviously just a coincidence and wouldn't in any way influence someone's attitude to relationships...

I guess that’s personal experience feeding a bias then.

Wow after that exchange - I can see exactly why someone is single!

I would guess that for many of us who have seen the emotionally unavailable or emotionally avoidant attachment style we know that they would all say that there is nothing wrong with them- or that the reason they keep cycling the same relationship pattern is luck of the draw.

There may be a few people that things genuinely haven’t lined up for, but in more cases it’s people denying they have a problem.

In the OPs brothers case he is meeting women, deciding they aren’t the one any yet continuing relationships with them, presumably because they feel “safe” because he knows he isn’t actually going to get too attached and therefore hurt. He isn’t the one ending relationships, they are when they finally realising it isn’t going anywhere- in the meantime he is more comfortable in a relationship that he knows isn’t going anywhere than actually looking for love.

Because sometimes there are no reasons beyond the 5 things I mentioned not lining up. It’s that simple for some people and for me that’s all it is. Nothing from childhood. No issues. No deep seated trauma.

Just simply not meeting anybody. The end.

I can absolutely comprehend that some people do have a reason “why” that is more complex than simply not meeting the right person.

I don’t know why you cannot comprehend that for some people it simply is just a case of not meeting the right person.

I don’t think she said her DB has said he has issues. He just said he has not met the right person.

"They simply have never met the right person for them. I genuinely don’t see why you find that hard to imagine."

Of course I can imagine not having found the right person. What I'm seeing is a complete reluctance from you to consider the reasons why.

In any case, we're not going to agree and this is not really relevant to OP anyway as her DB does admit he has issues.

Exactly. Saying some people have issues is absolutely fine but to insist anybody long-term single at 50 simply has issues is really such a simplistic way of viewing the world.

Yes so as I said “luck”. If person A simply finds more people attractive than person B, that does not mean person B has an issue.

If person A meets more available people than person B that does not mean person B has an issue.

They simply have never met the right person for them. I genuinely don’t see why you find that hard to imagine.

Not everything needs to be pathologised.

Yes and you decided to generalise and said that people who are long term single have “issues” which I disagree with.

But you are assuming that anybody single past a certain age must have an issue they are not confronting which is silly.

For starters a number of single people simply don’t actively date which is not an “issue” as you would label it.

We’re talking about single people though. I can honestly say I met far more single men in my 20s that my 30s and 40s combined.

"perhaps a more accurate description is that many people have issues they need to work through, whether or not they are long term single."

of course many people have issues, but that has nothing to do with the thread, which is about single people.

perhaps a more accurate description is that many people have issues they need to work through, whether or not they are long term single. My dad is a narcissist and abusive and has never been single in his life. The best thing he could do would be to be single but abusive people never are. Whereas my late grandmother was a single parent, never married and was the most level headed and lovely woman you could meet. Her main issue was that she wouldn’t put up with bullshit which ruled out most men she met.

But by the age of 50 you have had many opportunities to meet people.

Yes, but can't you understand that some people will more easily find those qualities in others due to how their love patterns work, how easily they are attracted to someone, can form relationships, etc. You could call that luck of course in that we all have different personalities, but I don't think it's luck in the sense of just not happening to meet the right person, unless you're comparing one person who travels the word with another who is stuck in a convent.

Like you, I don't find many men attractive and you could call me 'fussy', but that's a feature of my personality (either innate or more likely from childhood) and it's not down to pure luck.

Also why would it be more likely at 30 than 50. At 50 you meet far fewer available people.