To not understand this trend of men waiting until middle age to commit

[Ageingisaprivilegedeniedtomany]

I've seen on here a few times and irl that early 30s is apparently too young for men to settle down these days and most don't contemplate it until nearer 40?
I just don't understand tbh, 30 is relatively young but they're not 21 year olds.
I'm 32 and recently left a 29 year old who wouldn't commit. My Mum keeps telling me I need someone a lot older, but tbh I don't want anyone significantly older.
Also hearing that most men are ambivalent about having children and do it to keep their partners happy.
Just feel a bit fed up tbh. Obviously it's a massive generalisation but I just don't get it and hope it isn't entirely true

I think it's an even higher percentage tbh but I wouldn't quite word it like MintJulia. It's about compatibility - in terms of attraction, sex, domestic habits, life goals, values, everything. I would say 90% of the men I've ever met would not be decent life partners for me. Most of them would be (and are) decent life partners for someone they're compatible with.

True compatibility is really really rare.

The slut-shaming on this thread is surreal and bonkers, but it does bolster my theory that a certain strain of anti-sex thought prevalent on MN under the guise of "feminism" ends up being identical to fundamentalist religious oppression. I'm also not sure - as a woman who has enjoyed a lot of casual sex - why, if my wanton behaviour has indeed made men reluctant to settle down, that's even my problem.

Pointing out that men would be more likely to commit to marriage/children if sex outside of marriage wasn't available to them isn't 'slut shaming' and it isn't a criticism of anyone's lifestyle.

In the same way the people arguing that men are as keen on children and LTRs as women aren't calling anyone frigid or boring or whatever the opposite term would be.

This. DH and I had one child by choice when I was 39. Someone who wanted more children, and wanted them earlier wouldn’t have been for me.

My sole friend who married and had a child at 26 now says she wonders what the hurry was.

I’m not religious. My motivation for not engaging in casual sex before I got married was because I enjoy men treating me well and romantic dating far more. I also wanted to get married. I realised men respond better to less interest. Less texts, less time on the phone, less willingness to sleep with them. All of this means they’ll pursue harder if they find you attractive. I’m not a housewife clucking over the fence at young girls in miniskirts as someone described up thread. I get that women can enjoy casual sex and that’s fine as long as they don’t expect commitment as well.

Well if everyone waits til late 30's and early 40's to start families then it's unlikely many children will have grandparents have very long.

If there's no implied criticism, then why buy into the negative framing of this dynamic?

I don't see the availability of sex outside marriage as a problem. I don't see the reluctance of anyone to commit to marriage/children as a problem either, whether it stems from the former or not.

There's a thread in Relationships right now about how long posters waited to have sex and many of the answers disprove your theory. Any dating theory based on the premise that all men behave in the same way is kind of silly.

@Pelham678 I think you must come from a particular demographic though because I don't recognise this among all my friends. (Do you know lots of high-achieving men?)

It’s an odd way to put it. Generally high achieving would equate extremely hard working surely? You say all your friends (male) had kids in their 20’s/30’s. The reality is to do this they likely didn’t work extremely hard and that reflected in their achievements at that point, OR they did work extremely hard and the result was their partner/wife constantly slamming Mumsnet with AIBU/Relationship posts that they were never home, worked all hours, didn’t share in childcare or household duties and so forth.

The men in my demographic choose to work extremely hard and don’t wish to permanently partner/have children until they can achieve stability in terms of desired housing in a desired location and the ability to provide the time and energy required to be a husband/father. That means later when the 15 years of utter nose to grindstone has paid off and they are in a position to dictate such terms.

Well it worked for me.

If you think someone is negative framing why not quote them and address the negative framing? I haven't seen it.

If you don't see reluctance to have kids as a problem then great, nor do I, but some people do, including the OP. Hence this thread.

I actually agree with you about the freedom, @Diaria

But that wasn't what the OP was talking about. If nobody wants to get married or have children, then they can do what they like. I wouldn't want to live with a man again, and my children are grown up so there is no risk of me wanting any more. So I can in theory shag a different man every night with no strings at all. I wouldn't choose to, but that's very different from a younger woman who wants to have children.

That woman is well advised not make a potential male partner work a bit harder. As someone said upthread, so many women now give men absolutely everything: sex, domestic chores, children ... and delude themselves into thinking that their "partner" is as committed to them as a husband would be. From a man's poitn of view, they get absolutely everything, and have to give nothing in return. If the relationship ends, they don't have to give the woman a penny (because it's normally the woman who's sacrificed career/salary progression). You see it time and again on here: women asking what their rights are as an unmarried mother who has been dumped. The answer is: none at all.

If you want legal rights, you have to be married. If you want to get married, don't give men everything they want for free.

@gannett if they don’t stick around because you have delayed having sex the relationship probably wouldn’t have lasted anyway. Also as I said further up thread it’s not just about waiting to have sex, women need to show less interest in general to men they are merely dating. Being too available, gifting them, introducing them to loved ones and friends, calling and texting multiple times a day. These things don’t usually work either

So initially I disagreed with your friend as you arguably get the time at one end or the other- my mum was an empty nester at 46 ( dsis and I both at uni and we never lived at home again as got jobs elsewhere on graduating) BUT that is changing- so many parents still doing a lot of active/ involved parenting of adult children, plus trend for adult children to live at home a lot longer, and delayed fledging, so maybe there has been this shift in thinking to a realisation that you may not get that time at the end so better to delay and at least get it at the beginning. It does make sense.

Agree! People making out that it’s a conscious decision when it’s likely the majority of times it isn’t. People also forget that it’s entirely luck whether you happen to meet someone who is on the same level as u as the same time. (Or bad luck if they go on to be around the 60% of marriages which fail!)

you are an entirely different person in your 20s and 30s than you are when you’re 40+. It’s only luck if you happen to meet someone in your 20’s/30’s who grows with you rather than grows in an opposite direction.

That's not a bad thing at all.

I would say it's because they love the people they are with and although don't necessarily want children, think it's inevitable with most partners and so agree with it. It happens alot! But that's why I've also said great if it's changing and people (both men and women) are realising there are other options in life. I'm not that old, but certainly when I was growing up the thought was: Uni>Career>Marriage>Baby

Most of my husbands friends in early 40s don't have families and it looks like they will stay like this. It's understandable you finally in a comfortable state when they can enjoy life why the hell would you change this with a wife and screaming kids.

This is a depressing thread. Some of the comments feel like a female equivalent of those weird incel types - there are so many horrible stereotypes about men only wanting to be with young women and abusive language to describe men who don’t want babies at the ‘right’ age (basically when the posters wants a baby). Some women want babies early and so do some men; some women prefer to wait and so do some men. Some never want to have children. You need to accept that you may fall in love with someone who doesn’t want the same path as you and then decide what you would do. Is a baby or your relationship more important? Will one of you compromise? The alternative is to screen people earlier in the dating process and hope that the spark happens. It’s very…mechanical though.

OP, you are ruling out potential partners because they don’t want a a baby at the same time as you, rather than choosing someone you love. Do you want to be in a loveless marriage because you found someone who wanted children, although he may not have actually been someone you felt had the spark? Can you convince yourself you have fallen in love with someone? Do you care or is your priority having children? Realistically, if you are 30 now, you will probably date for a few years before having children and attitudes often change (although it isn’t a given).

In my experience virtually all the men I know want children (not necessarily with any woman). Some settle down very young and some when they are older.

@GreenIsMyFavoriteColour

Mumsnet is for Mums…. Hence the name.

I’m always mystified why men choose to be on it, or people who don’t have children, or people outside U.K. as it’s a U.K. site, but I suppose that speaks to its popularity, reaching beyond the target audience.

Regards porn sites, a lot of it is made for men and made badly, meaning that even if women were to access it much of it would be unappealing. I guess this is yet another area where inequality persists.

I think the main difference between men and women with regard to sex and settling down is the ticking clock that hits round about 28/29 for women and becomes more ferocious towards 40.

Without this I suspect women would be much the same as men in their motivations and time frames.

I know I was and would have remained so without developing gynae issues.

This is rubbish IMO, I met DH in our twenties but I'm three and a bit years older, he thought I was younger tbf but only his age, we were besotted with each other from day 1, I was living with someone at the time and moved out aa soon as I returned home as i met DH in a City that my DF was living in and she was the reason i was there. We had DS who is 16 now, 2.5 years after we met, we were in middle class professional jobs in London and DH was still not a qualified Architect but having a baby was the pinnacle of this profound love for each other, our colleagues and bosses were mostly perplexed because of our age and not having established ourselves with a higher level in our careers or a big enough house (lived in a one bedroom flat). It was difficult in that DH was studying and working whilst I was on maternity leave and to become an Architect is very demanding studies wise but we are now in early to mid forties and we are pleased we did it that way around. Lots of clients of DH's now are surprised he has a 16 and a 12 year old as many of them only have babies in their early forties as do many of our friends only have young children. Our relationship can be tumultuous but we still have a strong love for each other that's akin to when we met, we definitely weren't restrained in showing our keenness for each other but he still adored me and I him so when you are in love I don't think those kind of games mean anything!

Well, the woman yes, but not the man. They don't have the same biological clock so why would they see the need to hurry?

Well I agree it's unfair they can have children at almost any age, but that's evolution's fault and not men's!

I don't understand their way of thinking, I couldn't imagine being in my mid 30s now and having parents who are well past retirement age and could well have dementia/be in a care home/no longer be alive by their 70s. Certainly no grandparents around for long, I don't know why that's a good thing as someone mentioned up thread?

I have worked in many care homes previously and we have several residents from 70 upwards, it's not unheard of. couldn't imagine having to go through that in my 30s (unless didn't meet the right partner till later or had fertility issues etc )