Where did all the good men go in the UK?

[DadAManger]

I am asking this for a friend - really!

I hear over and over now from my single friends over 30 that there is a massive shortfall in good quality men in the UK?

Do MN users and readers agree? What are your own experiences? Many happily married women on here I'm sure, so what's your view?

One thing I do notice myself - but don't necessarily share with my single friends (I like them) - is that a lot of them seem to have long lists of "must-have/must-be" points for a guy to be up to standard for them?

I don't drink alcohol either
I don't mention it on an OLD profile purely because I don't want anyone to assume I am

Boring
Ex alcoholic
Prude
Religious nutter

But if I met someone who refused to date me because of it I'd be glad to pass him by

[quote ActuallyIveGotDental]@KatherineJaneway I think that's actually the shallowest thing I've ever read on here. Not being interested in a person because they don't drink alcohol? They reasons for that could range from previous personal experience, religious beliefs, family history, to simply not liking it or even medical conditions or medication! Someone not drinking alcohol doesn't affect another person in any way (unlike how actually drinking alcohol can) and can't be compared to smoking in any way- which can't not affect others!

I used to be teetotal, but still loved a good night out and for bonus was always the cheap taxi driver for my friends! It was religious reasons in my case. I'm not teetotal anymore but that doesn't change who I am as a person, how I behave, or how much fun I am or can have.[/quote]
It's not shallow at all.
I feel the same way in fact and I disagree that it doesn't affect the other person.
I'm not a heavy drinker at all, but quite a bit of my social life is going out for a couple of drinks in the pub/cafe or having a couple of glasses with dinner. I'd want to be with somebody I could share that with.
You say you still loved a good night out, so that kind of t-total person might be Ok for me, but I've had friends who've wanted to move from a pub after half an hour because being non-drinkers they've become bored very quickly or they just don't go to pubs at all. That would be a no-no for me.
Same would go for someone who doesn't like eating out. I have a friend who's too tight with money to go to restaurants except on special occasions and that's fine with me. I can meet her for a walk in the park. But I wouldn't want that with a boyfriend.

@TomPinch

Gwenhwyfar

No, it was more that there was a general understanding that the point of dating was, ultimately, to find a life partner or at least LTR. Not that anyone (male or female) was really pushing it as such.

That's not what I've seen around me in my life at all. If you're talking about young men in particular.

Some are right here 😉

That's fine @Gwenhwyfar but you've specified that what you're offended by is not the fact that they're not drinking but the way the person behaves, I'm not like that at all, and neither are most of the people I know who don't drink- coming from the religious background I do, there are a lot of us, so I'm not speaking as an odd one out. I do however, find the assumption that we will behave a certain way to be rather unfair without getting to know us first! Certainly in my background we're incredibly socially oriented, non-judgemental, and most definitely not pushy with our beliefs either.

As I say, I do drink now due to a status change in my church (I was never morally against it) but who I am and how I behave has remained consistent.

Gwenhwyfar,

I guess that just shows that attitudes differ from one group to the next. But I totally recognise what you're saying, especially these days.

Speaking for myself though, I've been married a long time, but if I was dating again, I would probably have absolutely no interest in people who weren't sure what they wanted, or wanted to keep their options open, or who were just after a bit of fun. I think I'd just find it exhausting and annoying.

Someone kind, reliable and after a LTR, everything else would probably be less important. Basically someone who wouldn't fuck me around.

I think for men coming out of LTR who are decent, particularly in rural areas but also in eg. a special hobby group, word gets around the community quite quickly and they are snapped up, either through the efforts of a matchmaking female friend or by another woman who has had their eye on them.
Sometimes the husband is the last one to notice that their marriage is over.
You need to be in at least one strong community group to be in the running, and be friends with happily married women who would like to see you paired off.
IME most good men don’t ever have a long period of being single unless they are really broken by the previous relationship. Even then, there are women fluttering around them staking a claim. They move seamlessly onto the next relationship.
They aren’t on OLD.

All the good men are already taken. As are all the good women. That's just life - the good ones get taken off the shelf the quickest. The exception is that (with divorce rates being higher/marriage rates lower), people become single again. No matter how long they take to get back into the dating game, once they do, the best ones won't stay single for long.

Having said that, there are actually lots of good men out there, they just aren't exciting, extroverted or attractive enough to get noticed. I've got friends who've literally never had a relationship their whole lives, some of the nicest, most honest men I know. Maybe it's because of a lack of confidence, maybe it's a lack of desire, I don't know why exactly, but they've been single that long that I'm not sure there's any way back for them. Men in their 40's and 50's - financially and emotionally stable, the perfect batchelor's on paper, but I think they're probably undateable to be honest.

@TomPinch

Gwenhwyfar,

I guess that just shows that attitudes differ from one group to the next. But I totally recognise what you're saying, especially these days.

Speaking for myself though, I've been married a long time, but if I was dating again, I would probably have absolutely no interest in people who weren't sure what they wanted, or wanted to keep their options open, or who were just after a bit of fun. I think I'd just find it exhausting and annoying.

Someone kind, reliable and after a LTR, everything else would probably be less important. Basically someone who wouldn't fuck me around.

I should have added that OLD seems to promote all the things that I'd be very keen to avoid.

altmember

The single man you describe, I reckon that could easily have been me. Why?

I'm short.
I'm thin
I'm religious, ie, trad church in Sunday
I look like Michael Gove

Naturally I think I'm a good bloke but these things do matter.

@Oreo01

SilenceIsNotAvailable- Your response to TossaaCoin.

I agree but don't know where to find this group of people. If I did then I wouldn't look any further, although reading the pages of MN it seems pretty clear this group exists.

We're here, including me! But many of us are reluctant to get into another relationship unless it is with someone really special as we've been burned already, and value our independence and financial freedom and free time, and also like you want boundaries that keep our children and dating separate. Oh and you'd be very unlikely to find us on online dating.

I wonder if there’s a correlation between men who seek equal partnerships ( ie value women for human attributes not just appearance) and intelligence . I suspect this is likely.

I recall some research demonstrating this. When I have time I'll try to find it and post it.

@LivBa ok then please regale us with your career success? The bitterness pours out of your posts very clearly. I have many, many female friends who have happy marriages to men of similar academic, career and financial success and they are not "run ragged" and their children get plenty of time with both parents. Indulging this fiction that women must marry someone 20 years older than them and be a 1950s-style housewife for a family to function properly is classic misogyny and it's laughable that you believe this.

[quote LivBa]@SilenceIsInvisible
To add to my above post, there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with a woman who wants to stay at home with their kids and be a "housewife". Housewife has become such a dirty word.There's a trend nowadays to create shame around women who want to focus on bringing up their kids... as if they're not "good enough" as women who are simultaneously working. It's utter rubbish. I have a full on career where I've made a lot of impact in different ways but I certainly don't see a woman who's a SAHM as "lesser" than me.

Bringing up the next generation is a huge and vital job in and of itself, and for many people, looking after young kids 24/7 is actually more taxing than a full time demanding career.

This toxic devaluation of "at home" roles is one of contributing factors to why a lot of these so-called high flying men are often reluctant to pull their weight at home. If society, including women themselves, devalue it so much, of course people start to subconsciously see looking after their own kids and home as "below" them.[/quote]
Nobody said there is anything wrong with people being SAHMs if they wish to. What I called out was your assertion that poor little menz have to seek out women 20 years their junior to find someone compatible to marry because they could clearly never be happy sharing responsibilities equally with someone their own age and with a similar level of career success etc. 🙄

@Whoarethewho

Many men will ask the same thing about women. Trying to find one that is not just trying to find a man to give them children or comes with 3 children with 3 dad's who needs a forth to complete her family. Finding one prepared to contribute financially and not rely on being subsidised ( and I include saving for retirement in that) finding one who is attractive and not overweight and finding someone who wants to equally contribute to the relationship in terms of jobs and not conform to gender stereotypes and roles within the house. And above all intelligent where the first thing discussed isn't love island, pregnancies in little mix and how maths and science is hard and "I don't do that".

Bloody hell. Where are you meeting these women?! 😆 They sound horrendous.

@User135644

So if you are saying nearly all of those men are married but not all of those women are, what are the conclusions about why this could be?: many men do not choose wives who can have an equal partnership with them and instead deliberately choose someone who is somehow lacking in qualities they presumably value in themselves?

Women usually look to marry up, men are often content with the cute young nurse (as described earlier in the thread).

The more successful women become, the fewer her options to marry up.

I'm mot sure that's true. Most women I know tend to marry someone their equal in terms of intellect, career etc. And like I said previously if shallow men who have no interest in an equal relationship whose main criteria are "hot young naive nurse" take themselves out of the market that's better for everyone, except probably said nurse.

@Holowiwi

Men in their 40s that can date 20year olds consistently are pretty damn rare. Most men cannot do this. I noticed that people like to associate being 'hot' with being less intelligent? Pretty sure that people can be both.

Ultimately what men prioritise in their partners is not the same as what women prioritise (generally). And no amount of shaming will change that. People are simply not PC when it comes to relationships and nor should they be.
If a woman is attractive, fit, feminine and friendly she will be inundated with higher quality candidates for relationships.

Women that are successful in life may struggle to find men they deem worthy because women like to marry sideways and up. So the more successful she becomes the fewer men that she may consider to be suitable. The problem occurs when men she would like are not interested in her because men do not weigh the same qualities equally and are more than happy to marry that attractive and friendly sales assistant. If anything doing so will make both their lives easier then marrying a female version of themselves.

I don't understand this post. You say that successful men may not be attracted to successful women because they don't value the same qualities equally, but that attractive, fit, feminine, friendly women will be inundated with offers. Does that mean that you believe that no successful women are attractive, fit, feminine or friendly? Most that I know are all of those things.

@Miasicarisatia

My preference is for a man who is is tall and muscular ie who looks intimidating and threatening (because that stops other people from giving me grief), but isn't too intelligent so that I can control him easily. Kind of useful idiot I suppose 🤷‍♀️

😂😂😂

Nurses these days are graduates, with responsibilities for people like us living or dying, so I think it’s rather ridiculous to use them as an example of a profession that is naive, etc. however young or hot they may be.
Cliches and stereotypes galore.

I think that's actually the shallowest thing I've ever read on here. Not being interested in a person because they don't drink alcohol?

I agree, especially when you don't even know the reasons why. I know of a family where the men can't drink alcohol, it actually kills them (they found out the hard way) - it doesn't make them not worthy of a second date! Even if someone doesn't drink by choice it doesn't affect their personality. Your post says a lot more about you than the man you had a date with.

@ActuallyIveGotDental thank you for sharing that. Nothing in your post suggests marrying down in my view though. To me that term implies someone of a lower intellect or more immature and it doesn't sound like either of those things applies.

content with a cute young nurse

Are you talking about rich octogenarian men? In need of daily care?
Most nurses I know are super busy with their career and very dedicated. Average men would be marrying up and need to pitch in with household tasks if they chose a nurse.

@LolaSmiles

But why should the second be "nice to haves" e.g. if you have a good career you would have more in common with someone who does too? If you earn a fair bit having a very low earning partner who can't pay their way in doing things you enjoy like holidays/ meals out etc would be awkward and these types of things added together also mean they probably have very different priorities, opinions, frames of reference, interests, topics of conversation, hobbies etc so there would be little in common. Not in all cases, but most. They aren't all individual factors: they are in many ways interdependent and a lack of any commonality usually means no spark

Because if someone is waiting for someone who ticks all the first list (which we agree are reasonable) AND all of the second then they're hanging on and ruling out loads of people I'm favour of a fantasy.

There's a huge difference between:
A) This is the sort of lifestyle I enjoy and I'd like to be in a relationship with someone who feels the same. This probably means they'll be earning a similar amount to me, give or take.
B) I'm only interested in lawyers, doctors, dentists, financial advisors etc because I couldn't possibly date someone in what I consider to be a 'lesser' job.

Or

A) I'd like to have things in common with a potential partner.
B) They must be interested in gardening, must enjoy going to the gym, must not be interested in cycling because I hate it. They must have the same political views as me on all topics. I will also only consider dating someone if they will exclusively do the holiday type I want because I'm unwilling to try anything different.

Most people are probably in Camp A.
Some people are in Camp B and then wonder why they are finding it difficult to find someone. The likelihood is they could have dated half a dozen lovely people, if they were willing to look past the fact they didn't like a guy's shoes on the first date or the fact he said he liked running instead of football.

This I totally agree with. Apologies if I misinterpreted your earlier post because how you've phrased it here makes total sense to me.

[quote DeadlyMedally]@Miasicarisatia
I don't try and pull them because it would be weird and grim and embarrassing for all of us.
Why do you think that though?
Why would it be any more "grim and embarrassing" than approaching a stranger who was similar in age?
Would it be less so if one of those 22 year olds chose to approach you instead of you approaching them?
If so, why is that?[/quote]
Because it's like trying to date/ sleep with someone who could be your child and has that level of life experience. Yuk.

@Gwenhwyfar

"Intelligence, not class.

Young, pretty and thick is fine for fun, but that combination objectively is marrying down - for men or for women - because marriage is meant to be a long-term thing and only one of these traits endures."

My question was to OP. I don't she (now realise it's probably a he?) talking about intelligence at all. She was talking about jobs/class.

A sense of humour is also on most people's "list".