the age thing..dating younger?

Back when the spouse emeritus and I had first come to the conclusion that our days together were drawing to a close, she said something along the lines of "It'll be easy for you, there are so many more single women these days..you'll be out there dating away before very long".

"And you know, it really isn't fair at all" she said.  "Your pool of available dates will be so much larger....You can easily date as young as 35.  "Women my age"?  "We have to start looking at guys up to 10 years older because of all the men who date younger".

Now, my initial reaction to this discussion was that I really didn't think I would be dating anytime soon and that the prospect of dating younger seemed ridiculous.  At least it did for me.

And by younger, let's set that parameter as thirty five to forty.  Below that seems a stretch, even if the adage that "half your age plus seven" is the lowest limit of one's accepted date-ability age range.  By that one I am apparently not in dirty old man territory as long as the women are at least 33.5 years old.

The other one I know says your age less fifteen years is fine, which puts me at a lowest limit of 38.  So let's split the difference and define "young" as my age goes as anywhere from 35 to 40, with 40 and up being more respectable and below 35 just plain wrong. 

That cleared up..here is why I was skeptical of the spouse emeritus' original assertion.

I work in a young industry and while I enjoy the energy and creativity of those younger than I (virtually everyone in my business), it is more than apparent that our cultural milestones involve an age divide that it is sometimes hard to bridge.

I notice this mostly as goes musical taste but it extends to just about everything.  Mention just about any event from one's relative youth and the most common rejoinder is "Wow...I was in public school when that happened".  Or the even worse "I wasn't even born then!".

And then there is the matter of appearing date-worthy to a younger skew.

Now my peers in years usually express amazement that i am indeed 53 ( a genetic thing as it certainly wasn't clean living that did that..my twenties can best be described as an experiment in enhanced living through chemistry).

But anyone under 40 generally just nods at my answer.

Attend a younger event and you will get a taste of this.  To those significantly less long in the tooth than ourselves (under 35),  we fifty-somethings appear every bit our age in comparison, and worse, become somewhat invisible.

So getting a younger women's attention?  A daunting challenge at best, let alone actually gathering up the gumption to arranging a date. And  I say this knowing I am reasonably well preserved, relatively stylish and if not ruggedly handsome, at least attractive to some.

As for the "gumption" thing..well..I am a bit shy at first and always have been.  In my youth I was a working musician which pretty much eliminated the need to be all that garrulous as far as meeting girls went.  I still play but have seen no evidence of that being a weapon in the arsenal of attraction at this point in my life...more's the pity.

By the way, the "attractive to some" statement is neither a knock on the spouse emeritus' taste in men or a boastful figment of my ego.  Can't have people thinking she just "settled".   I did marry "up" as go looks but I have seen bigger divides.  At least I think I have.  That may indeed be the ego talking. 

As for the truly important stuff?  Yes, she could have done better, but that is true of virtually all the paired off women I know in some way or another.  Thank god for the diversity of causality as to why women might find us men attractive.

By the way....I am suddenly cognizant that I am guilty of setting a lower limit of date age appropriateness but not an upper range.  By all logic having set a lower number some 18 years younger than my age, I should consider that absolutely fine for a woman as well.

Which would mean that i should be open to hearing from seventy-one year old women.

Hmmm..need to re-think those equations.

since the medium is the message, it is best to keep yours both rare and well done

if the recent onslaught of facebook movies are any indication, it appears that many of us fifty-somethings delved into social media in 2007.

which means that most of us have been practiced at the digital art of saying hello for some seven years now...and by "most of us", well....i mean me.

from facebook to linkedin, to the now, near barren forums of myspace and classmates, we learned that the "reach out and touch someone" approach to saying "hello, remember me" or "hey, let's be friends" was a pretty painless way to establish or re-establish a connection.

but this is my year of being a fingleton (newly single in a fifty-ish way), so move that same experience to a dating site?  suddenly a "hello" is replete with meaning that goes way beyond that of one delivered on facebook let's say.

because in this case, the medium is the message.

and that message is.."hey i'd like to date you".

which is the point after all.  but it is one that creates a dilemma of sorts when you come across someone you know on-line.  and that dilemma is that there is a bit of a thrill that happens when you recognize someone from your life here, someone you find attractive that is.

it feels like you already have lots in common...you know me, i know you and we both are on a dating site.

i mean really, what could go wrong with a simple hello?

now i've been on both sides of this equation and can honestly say that the women i knew who contacted me on a dating site were indeed just saying hello...usually to confirm that i was actually no longer with the spouse emeritus or to compare notes as goes the on-line dating thing.

i have been guilty though of sending off a hello to a woman or two that i knew from some time or place in my life.  and as much as i may have crafted my missive as a "hey...you're here too!, just wanted to say hi" kind of thing, if pressed i was probably (ok..definitely) testing the waters oh so passively with the real message of this medium, the aforementioned "hey, i'd like to date you".

and the result?

message read, message deleted, message unresponded to.

no confusion there.

some embarrassment though.

the lesson learned?

leave the past alone.

while i am not sure that approach is a universal golden rule as goes dating site n-etiquette, i personally will yield to resisting the urge to reach out to those i recognize in future.

which is not to say you should....i will just assume you are comparing notes.

breaking the code: why yoga is so much more than a four letter word

Male urban based "fingleton"s (50-ish and newly single) soon come across an interesting thing when perusing dating profiles. The on-line profiles of the urban based female contain myriad commonalities as far as past times and passions go.

And these commonalities are so prevalent that one might be tempted to think there are an awful lot of people out there living essentially the same life.

So what is going on here?

The answer?

Coding.

That very same phenomena that has web folk seeding on-line copy with keywords and phrases to improve their positioning in web searches appears to have seeped into the on-line dating world via osmosis but with with a  twist.
My guess is that these keywords have more to do with repelling inappropriate suitors than attracting a wider net of the aspiring.

At least that is my theory as to why "yoga" is the word i see most often when pouring over profiles.

Not that yoga is a bad thing...after all it says I am serious about my physical and spiritual well-being, that I am willing and committed to make time for detoxing my body and soul and that by extension....you should too.

I wonder though if this word delivers that message in the way we men of a certain age are meant to understand it.  And by "we", I mean me.

The thing is, that while many men I know (including myself) have tried yoga..most of us don't stick with it.  We're also not (in general) very pro-active on spiritual well-being.

We try yoga because our backs hurt and understand it to be a lower impact workout.  We are looking (mistakenly) for an easier way to cure what ails us.

We also enjoy rooms full of women in yoga gear.

As for the spiritual element?  Aside from the aforementioned "women in yoga gear" comment, the spiritual aspect of yoga's benefits escape many of us (and again by "us"...I mean mostly me).

Which is not to say that we don't feel something akin to spiritual well-being. It's just that we are generally made aware of a purpose to it all via a favourite sporting teams success, a guitar hero's amazing solo or an unexplainable series of green lights all the home during a commute.

The good news?

We are not immune to the appeal of what women may be trying to convey but we have our own set of keywords and code for the same.

What you might be trying to say via the word yoga, we might say by expressing a dedication to regular gym visits and time spent outdoors (even if those gym visits are not exactly regular and our idea of roughing it is not having wi-fi access).

I cannot say the same however about my brethren's reaction to the words "salsa dancing".

Or "exotic travel" for that matter.

Those just plain scare the shit out of us.

might i suggest a bucket for that list?

Hollywood has much to answer for.  At least it does when you listen to people with an ideological bone to pick.

Fundamentalists attack what they see as a glorification of sex and loose morals.  Anti-consumerism advocates decry the proliferation of product placement.  And given the thin skins of virtually everyone these days, you can be assured that someone is going to be distressed by any film of any type, particularly if it spawns some type of cultural phenomena.

So now it's my turn.

I would like to take issue with the producers of the morgan freeman/jack nicholson movie "the bucket list".

Why?  Because on top of all the considerations that make the 50-ish single man "dateable", apparently you can now add sharing a long list of suitable and compatible "dream-do's" to that already, daunting menu.

Courtesy of that damn movie. 

Now you would think that a film centred on two old farts traipsing around the world filling what time they have left with adventures that complete their lives would ultimately be seen as a "buddy" flick...a predominantly male kind of thing.

But no, its success was based on a more universal appeal as goes the idea of seeing the world and living life well beyond the edge of mundane.

Which is why the film found an audience among people of all ages and particularly, if on-line dating profiles are any indication, among women.  The term "bucket list" literally leaped into the vernacular courtesy of that impact.

And to not have one?

Well that would be the very definition of the shallow and unconsidered life.

Now I was aware while still married that the bucket list phenomena had garnered serious traction, but I was not much bothered by my own failure to walk around with an inspiring pail full of my own must do's.  In fact most of my male friends of a certain age were also relatively bereft of a full load of aspirational check offs.

Which is not to say that when asked I could not come up with a couple of things I would like to do or places I would like to see.  But given that Pete Townsend was unlikely to ask me to sub in on bass on the next who tour and that I had already met Alice Cooper, it was a pretty mundane list.

"Hmm", I would say to the spouse emeritus when asked, "I suppose I would like to spend a few days in Vegas with the guys, or maybe visit Switzerland again".

"You do Vegas every few years...and you grew up in Switzerland" the lovely emeritus would say, "Isn't there something bigger you'd like to do?  Something you haven't done before?

"Well, I'd like to play the Air Canada Centre with my band."

"No..something that might actually happen".

"Go for szechuan on spadina tonight?"

"I give up".

Looking back, my failure to embrace the notion of the bucket list was probably one of the last of the many nails in the coffin as went our future viability as a couple.  And while I take full responsibility for hammering in most of them, I blame hollywood for that one in particular.

And the bucket list continues to niggle as I peruse profiles in anticipation of entering the dating world.  For a man whose last serious thought about fanciful things I must do before I die included "being a beatle or an astronaut" this is daunting stuff.

But apparently absolutely necessary.

Hmmm....I wonder if mentioning that I am currently "exploring what to put in my bucket  list" will do for now?

A moving target: nailing one's on-line profile (version 23.0 and counting)

since jumping into the fray of okcupid, match and plenty of fish some six months ago i have revised, rewritten and then radically refashioned my profile intro numerous times.

i started off ever so carefully, explaining that i was very recently single after a long marriage, was unlikely to be a good fit for anyone looking for a long time partner, that i had traveled plenty enough thank you and that with a kid to get through university i was unlikely to be jetting off anywhere exotic anytime soon.

i also stated (diplomatically i thought in my then so naive mind) that i preferred thin/slim/athletic/fit women who lived in the city..downtown specifically and exclusively.

the result?

the sound of crickets for the most part.

deafening silence.

basically?

i blew it.

the few messages i sent went mostly unanswered.  the odd person would respond that i sounded angry or too lazy since i only wanted to date in my neighbourhood. most suggested that i was clearly not ready to date. none mentioned my honest approach as refreshing or admirable.

as a copywriter, i took these responses as i would objections from a client.  i had misunderstood the brief (at worst), my client had failed to see the innate power of an unfiltered pitch (at best) and that since the client is always right (even when wrong!) a rewrite was in order.

my intro went through several incarnations, each yielding slightly more positive reaction as i removed more of the limitations on my dating preferences.  finally i showed my profile to my ex and her sisters. 

my ex is a professional and wonderful writer.  as for my sisters in law?  they are veterans of on-line dating and have found what they sought; a relaxed, respectful companionship rather than full-time partners. an end result that i thought sounded just about right for me.

their feedback yielded the new/improved profile intro below (in italics)

Recently underwent the excruciating yet well meaning experience of having my ex-wife and her sisters vet my profile. Their conclusion?

"Lower your age, say that you love to travel and make it sound more like you are looking for a life-partner...you'll get more dates that way"

Opted not to take their counsel as went that advice but did edit out a sentence or two about the general physical types that attract me. "Those make you sound like a jerk" said they.

"Hmm...but what about all the profiles that mention tall men only etc, etc"

"That's pre-qualifying"

"But when a man does the same?"

"He's a jerk."

These being very smart women....the discussion stopped there, the point ceded and heeded.

well..what a difference that edit made.  the number of responses to the still paltry smattering of "hello's" i sent did increase.

the big change though was that the new version attracted a flood of messages from women who stumbled across my profile.

which would be a good thing except that they are almost to a person not even close to the set of parameters i excised from those earlier drafts as to what attracts me in a woman.

it's a conundrum...and one that raises a million uncomfortable considerations..mostly about my own self image and the growing suspicion that it may be a tad rose-coloured.

yipes.

the fingleton defined..male, 50+ and single (again).

february 12, 2014

it is somehow fitting that i am writing this blog on a rather ancient pc where my ability to capitalize appropriately is at best challenged.

perhaps i should be more exact here.  my pc's keyboard here at home is impaired to the point where eliminating capitalization altogether seems the way to go, in that it at least looks like a choice as opposed to a glaring lack of grammatical competency..

so basically, faced with a challenge based on age (the pc's), i opted for improvising rather than actually starting over with new equipment.

which i suppose is a fitting analogy for the whole single again post 50 scenario in general and dating in same condition specifically.

now,  in the interest of full disclosure, my progress into this brave new world after 23 years with the same woman (20 of which found us in a legally sanctioned state) is mostly hypothetical.

i have tread the waters of dating post 50 by maintaining profiles on several sites.

i've even been on a number of "coffee-dates" courtesy of messaging on said sites.   it's hard to describe these meetings as dates per se...they more resemble safe and easy to bail on transfers of basic information and validation of whether one's "product description" is as promised.

they are more than a bit like spies meeting at a pre-arranged drop spot for a document exchange...there's a tentativeness, a suspense, a plan for escape ready to be deployed...not exactly an environment given to the relaxed chats i had envisioned.

so..some seven months into this new state, one i define as being a "fingleton" (male and single again in one's 50's), i remain something of a babe in the woods.  strike that..i am a total babe in the woods.

which puts paid to a theory i had often heard pre-split.

that theory, spread mostly by groups of married men, held that there was a world of women out there waiting lustily for new members to be added to the small pool of age appropriate, available, single men.

there would be dates galore for any and all gainfully employed, remotely presentable men...the numbers alone guaranteed this as a legion of lonely post 40/50-ish women was swollen by a careerism that had postponed relationships or later in life divorces from schmucks not even remotely like us.

and this theory was unquestionable, having been verified by scores of guys who knew a guy that knew another guy who was single and out every night, punching way above his weight with gorgeous and insatiable women who found him inexplicably fascinating and irresistible.

it has proven to be a case of "if it sounds too good to be true...well, it is".

so...having accepted the reality that the "shooting fish in a barrel" scenario was a fiction of wishful thinking, i am ready to soldier on....and share my foray into the world of the "fingleton" as i go.

until next time