A man with an amicable ex and children or one who's never had a long term realtionship?

[Peaktime]

A hypothetical situation, we don't often get such a clear cut choice 😆

If you did, man one was married for a decade or so, has a nice realtionship with his ex, sees his kids EOW and school holidays. Pays what he should. Everything rubs along mostly, with the odd disagreement about time and parenting methods. They spend family occasions together.

Or single man, enjoys life. Nights out, holidays, sport. His time and money is his own. Has never had a real realtionship and possibly never properly grown up or had any real responsibilities.

Both in their mid 40s.

Oh, you've no desire for more children of your own. Yours are now adults.

Man 1

Yes, I know that's the sensible option.

I'm currently seeing man 2. It's fun. We're out and about enjoying life without any ties. In comparison to someone who struggles for cash (not that I want him to pay for me, but to be able to pay his way in joint trips and activities) and who's being pulled in all directions for his time?

When I was younger it wouldn't have been right for me, but now, when my own life is set up and I don't need a life partner to share responsibilities with?

I'd say 2. I would have been the female equivalent of him when I went online 10 years ago. Nowt wrong with me; just down to circumstances

It depends entirely on what you're looking for.

If you're after fun right now, with almost no chance that there's any future in it, then go for man 2.

If you're looking to build a long term relationship, then man 1.

Although if you're having to ask, you're probably not that into either of them.

Definitely 2, I'm married but if I was single I'd have no interest in a man with children. I never wanted my own so I wouldn't want someone else's 🤷‍♀️

who's being pulled in all directions for his time?

Having his kids ever other weekend is hardly being pulled in all directions for his time. He barely sees them.

Of course, it's a perfectly reasonable expextation for a father of young DC. It's not so good for a GF who has to plan everything around when he has his DC.

Why would there be no chance of a long terme relationship with man 2? Like a PP I was the female equivalent about 10 years ago (though I did have responsbilities —mortgage, bills and general home ownership, and my nights out were tame, cinema, dinners, a couple of drinks, theatre, concerts). I'm now 8 years into my first relationship. I'm glad I wasn't written off as no good for a long term relationship.

Man 1.

I feel exhausted just reading about Man 2 but would have gone for him when I was younger.

I went for man 2, but gave up on him when it became apparent that he was so used to living his own life, with no responsibilities, that he'd become really selfish. He wasn't really capable of putting anyone else first (but did appear to want me to put him first). I couldn't see myself getting older with him.

Fun but ultimately soul destroying.

Hmm. So far, this none doesn't seem like that. It's true he's used to doing his own thing, but he's quite considerate of the people around him and keen to try the things I enjoy, as well as introduce me to his interests.

Sorry, I certainly didn't mean to imply that someone who'd not had a serious relationship should be written off!

I was best man last summer for one of my best friends, who at 41, was getting married to his first serious girlfriend, who he'd met 2 years prior. I don't think there was anything wrong with him, he's an absolutely lovely bloke, just quiet, introverted, had a hard time getting to know people and he just hadn't met the right person.

Man 2 in OPs post didn't sound like he was single because he'd been unlucky in love though. He sounded like someone who was single because he'd always preferred to be single, and there's no indication that that has changed

I was trying to say that this specific man is a bad candidate for a relationship, rather than anything about people with little relationship experience as a whole.

Man 2 absolutely for me. But then I was the equivalent of Man 2 before DH and DH was a Man 2 as well. Also I would have never dated a man with kids regardless of whether I wanted kids or not.

Man 2. Man 1 may be lovely, but I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested in a man with children.

Number 2 every single day of the week. I have no inclination to deal with someone else’s baggage.