Living Single

I'm writing this before reading your post, Bella:

First impression: B.S. From the title alone we can see that the article is going to be about how now that she's finally single, she has to start "looking" right away again. Yes, it's mentioned how she was her church's first female pastor, and how she put off her first date with the funny dancing guy because she had other things important to her at that time--both of those are fine healthy attitudes for a single woman to take. But they are buried in the middle and at the end of the article.

The article assumes--and she does too- that she's going to want to start finding her second life partner right away again. And the article doesn't even have the courtesy to state this as a thesis sentence, as in, "She is happy to have divorced, enjoying life in her church etc etc, but she would be interested in finding love too--let's look at how easy or hard that may be for her." Instead, it's an unwritten assumption that *of course* she will start looking for a partner--so ingrained that it doesn't even need to be presented as a choice she made, but rather as a "given".

Christina

1) It would turn me away from divorce--"oh the dating world is so difficult!" -- "oh there are no tall men!"-- "because the man always has to be taller than the woman apparently!"

2) The last two paragraphs were great. They should have been the first two paragraphs. Then maybe the article wouldn't turn me (and presumably others) away from possibly much-needed divorces.

3) I think she is happy with her life and is pursuing relationships because she wants them to augment, not patch holes in, her life. However, the article doesn't portray it like that. It portrays her search for love at the primary goal that will provide cohesion for the rest of her interests and relationships.

Christina

I couldn't quite figure out what the point was. She's happy... she's unhappy... she's fulfilled... she's unfulfilled. I'd almost rather the article have been more focused (ergo, more matrimaniacal) so that it was about "here's what dating is like in the 50s" which is a perfectly reasonable thing to want to know about. Instead it was a mish-mosh of her being happily single and happy to be divorced but also desperate to be dating again.

I also couldn't figure out why it was making a big deal about how hard it is to date in your 50s. Sounds exactly like my experiences and I'm 34. Some people have a super easy time finding a life partner and some don't. Not a particularly newsworthy topic.

I think it interesting that the story is so one-sided. The story suggests that her husband also wanted to end the marriage. So, staying married in the "state of constant tension". was not an option.

I found the children's reactions interesting. Did the act of staying married in a manifestly unhappy marriage create in them an expectation -- and maybe a sense of obligation -- that staying in a tense and unhappy marriage is what "good people do". I also find it interesting that these young adults in their 20s view marital decisions of their parents as "screwing up their lives". Exactly how all-encompassing are the lives of these children? Did the "over-investment" in these children that people in bad marriages often make contribute to their inflated sense of the breadth of their lives.

The search for a "partner" is understandable. But the description does not seem accurate. As a 51 year old divorced professional, I have no interest in dating a woman younger than 40 and my "target market" is really 45 to 54. And, I would be delighted to meet a financially secure woman to whom I am attracted and with whom I am compatible -- divorce delivers a "large hit" on retirement planning, especially if you still have children to educate. So, this "marry young and down" bias may not be all that accurate.

The sense of "sexual morality" -- the close but not too fast -- is an interesting issue. If two 50 year old people are attracted enough to each other to go to bed on the first date -- so what. It is not like they are immature, or misty eyed virgins. The woman in the article has tow children! As a practical matter -- many older men are not that interested in immediate sex -- it carries a lot of risks -- disease, premature attachment etc.

> Before I tell you what I think, I'd love to hear your reactions.

Ok, I found the following statement to be factually untrue:

"And so, she exercised an option that women just a generation ago rarely used: the freedom to divorce and be single again, in their 50s."

Didn't the divorce rate peak ~25 years ago (i.e., about a generation ago), after climbing at a good clip for about the previous decade? And since the marriage rate was higher back then, wouldn't that mean the numbers of those divorcing as a proportion of the population were at about their highest "a generation ago"? And weren't a whole lot of those divorcing from marriages of 25-30 years duration, and thus at or around the age of fifty? "Rare" would not exactly be the word I'd use.

So I thought trying to paint the subject of the story as some pioneer heroine of womens-lib-via-divorce was a bit of a stretch.

And don't even get me started on the laughability factor involved with the NYT once again peddling MegaBS about the mythical Great American Man Shortage, in this case in an attempt to put the story's subject firmly in The Church of Perpetual Victimhood.

No she's not going to be the hottest thing going on the dating market, but her trying for perfection in hitting the Goldilocks Zone precisely with regard to some guy wanting to have sex with her in just the right amount, which is what the anecdotes clearly imply, is not going to help any. This would seem to be a no-brainer until one recalls that the first thing feminism did was outlaw thinking.

As someone mentioned earlier, I was initially rather perplexed by the fact that most of the article bemoans the lack of opportunities to meet someone... and the one seemingly good contact Ms. Shiber makes, she postpones for a mere weekly prayer meeting (postpones indefinitely? the article is unclear as to the outcome). It rather reminded me of friends I have that dwell on wanting to find a new job, but are always capable of making self-defeating excuses to remain in their current one. Sometimes I suppose the devil you know is better than the devil you don't, and it can take quite a bit of courage to dance with that new devil.

Also, I have to assume if she's a career minister then she's a highly religious and observant individual. There's nothing wrong with that, however it is a relatively small demographic group with its own unique norms and taboos that most of the general public, even those claiming to be religious, don't follow. If this article was meant to be solely about Ms. Shiber then I would have liked it to explore more fully her experiences as a highly religious person trying to date in a predominately secular society.

If this article was meant to be anecdotal about the pitfalls of being 50 and single in general, then I'm not sure if choosing such a self-restricting group as Protestant ministers works that well. The article seems to gloss over her religiosity as it pertains to finding a mate (so we can't know), but it would be understandable that she would want to meet someone that shares her convictions, but as highly observant men are probably more likely to remain married their entire lives out of religious conviction - her pool of possible mates may be much smaller than yours or mine... and therefor not a good representation of what the general reader's life would be like should they decide to get a little backbone and divorce their good-for-nothing spouse.

That said I did enjoy the article and I wish Ms. Shiber luck. I just wish the article could have made up its mind what it wanted to focus on.

Bella,

I'll be the first to admitt that I often find your assertions of singlism a bit of a stretch, but this article is clearly biased against single women. The woman in the article seemed perfectly happy. I too was confused as to why her dating life was made the focus. My aunt became single in her late 50s and she never even wanted to date. She has a busy, fufilling life and two grown daughters that help her see her marriage as something that perhaps served a purpose but is not neccessary to drag out, being that she is happier single. Immediately looking for a man suggests an incompletion of women. It's insulting.

I agree, Becky.

Also, the article points out several times the benefits of her singlehood. Nonethless, despite her feeling 'trapped' in a 'tension-filled' marriage, she wants to turn right around almost instantly and jump right back into a relationship!? In other words, she's jumping back on the "marriage go round." (or, at least, the "relationship go round").

At the outset of the artlce I already knew the article would take that approach - that she's a woman who surely must begin the sojourn of looking for another relationship.

I liked the story until I hit Shiber's complaint about having trouble finding a man. Come on! It sounds like she's got a wonderful life post-divorce and all she can see is that the stereotype of the coupled woman isn't filled by her. And then it's all about remarriage, remarriage, remarriage. I have to admit that I skipped to the end of the article because I didn't like how her life was portrait as revolving around finding a new husband. And I just about cried about the last sentence: I had this wonderful image of her sitting at the dinner table savoring her meal. But, no, that's not it: It's not a good meal because she's not sharing it with someone, preferably a guy, I suppose.

There are so many beautiful things in her life but all we're led to see is that she's not successful in finding a new hubby (I don't know if this is how she really sees it - who knows how long the interview was and how much was just picked out to weave that story line). It's sad: She has so much going for herself but that is nothing (!) without a husband.

I'm writing after having read only the article. It was so sad and pathetic it made me sick and I almost didn't finish. There are so many things bad about it.
-First of all, I have no pity for people who stay in a bad marraige. If you're so young and so different, don't get married in the first place. "But we're in LOVE!" is the stupidest line known to humanity. You don't know what love is.
-She moved into a condo to live a more compact life. Maybe she was forced to do this for financial reasons. Those are the only good reasons I can think of. As Dr. DePaulo has mentioned on several occasions, living single doesn't mean being obligated to living a packed life in a 750 square foot condo.
-She should speak for herself. Maybe she's looking for chemistry, searching desperately for a man. But if she has to ask someone else how much energy she should put into the process, the best answer would probably be zero.
-Her daughter graduated from Barnard and lives in Manhattan, yet all she's looking for at this time in her life is a life partner? She's bitching at her mom for getting out of a bad marraige? She sounds like an ungrateful, narrow-minded brat.
-Having a family shows you have more humanity...how?
-Now her churches get 'just her'? Poor, unlucky churches!

On the other hand, I don't think Christine is giving herself enough credit. She sounds like she's poised on the threshold of a fabulous single life, if only she'd stop holding herself back. Here's what I liked:
-She took what she saw as a 'plunge' and got a divorce. If she had given that much thought to her marraige in the first place, maybe she wouldn't have gotten married, maybe she could have saved herself 20-some years of misery.
-She joined a prayer group, reconnected with friends, and lost 25 pounds. And yet, it wasn't easy, adjusting to the single life.
-She has the glorious freedom to create a better life. Just do it! Guess what, the male ingredient is optional.
-She was the first female pastor in all 6 of her churches. She's a pioneer of her time!
-She takes charge of her day, sleeps late, makes pancakes, goes to the farmer's market, does things she loves to do.
-She has nice evenings making dinner for herself. She eats what she wants, when she wants.

Yet, as I look through the article again for good stuff, I seem to find more and more bad stuff. I'm just going to stop now.

Oh, probably the most important: CAN YOU IMAGINE SOMEONE WRITING AN ARTICLE LIKE THIS ON A 51 YEAR OLD WOMAN WHO JUST GOT MARRIED?

Hi....I am a 42 year old single woman, in relationship but not married.

I did not find anything upsetting or offensive about the article. I am curious what others who were upset found.

The woman seems very "OK" and enjoying her life, truly...just not the dating part and dealing with dating at that age.

As for me, it did make me feel fear in being single after 50. That is the only negative emotion I had. However, even though I have that fear myself, I don't fear 50+ single women at all. I am very open to people of all status's and ages.