San Diego Housing Bubble News and Analysis

Just to clarify my position a bit, it's not that I hold having kids against a man (as I have them myself). Still, I'm nervous.

Your meandering posts on this blog always have me wondering: where do your children fit into your life? You hardly ever talk about them. See other posts about celebrating parties, baby girl names, etc. Other parents here seem proud to talk of their children, but you seem to see them as an accessory and the children of potential man-victims of yours are a burden. You seem quite mal-adjusted and I hope you are lying about being a mother of 2. Sadly with all the news I see today, your type of parenting seems to be dime-a-dozen.

Your question should be: What is right for my kids? What can I do to improve their lives? Instead it is: who will date me? who can I date? why don't men buy me dinner? I'm so pretty! Look at my leg! me me me me me

When you meet someone new, you are not only exposing yourself. You are exposing your children to this person. Do you get this? When you started squeezing out those babies your priorities in life changed forever. You post a LOT about men and dating and divorce... Ever think about your kids? Why don't you post anything about them?

To be honest, I think the nature of a person is more important than wealth or age or whether they have kids. Your nature is the polar opposite of the kind of woman I would want in my life. Again, dime-a-dozen. It is whiny, entitled, immature, insecure, and incapable. You wanna know the best thing you can do to make yourself attractive to men? Be a good mother. Otherwise, you are a failure in the most important thing that will ever come of your life.

Those are my thoughts re. dating women with children.

Although I disagree with Tom Leykis on a lot of issues (never mind actually just some), he is absolutely right about his stands on single moms...never date a single mom, period.

Oh my God! This is crazy! Where are you getting this from?! Aside from ages and gender, I don't talk about my kids on a public message board because I don't want to expose them to perverts. I don't post pics of them either. Other people do and that is their prerogative. But, I have mentioned their gender and ages several times here.

Aside from the baby names, I don't recall seeing anybody on Piggington talk about their kids. I don't think of my kids as a burden and I have never thought of them that way. Are you pulling this out of a hat?!

I'm not looking for who I can date. When men approach me who have children, I am hesistant. That was my only point, and I was wondering how others feel about dating with children. When I date, I don't even bring my dates around children and I only date when they have their every-other-weekend with their father.

Your attack is really out there, unwarranted and nothing to do with me or my personality.

I create threads on a variety of topics, not just dating.

As far as me showing my leg, so what?? That was a joke between me and Alan from Fallbrook. You didn't have to look at it. What is the matter with you??

Marion,
I thought that attack on you was a tad harsh, as well!

I have a sister who is in her 40s (previously married, but no kids) who uses Internet dating sites and who tells me lots of ads for men seeking women specify that no women with children still living at home need apply. Others veil that same requirement with "you must be free to travel at any time." Which kinda excludes any woman with a regular job, as well. I wish you well.

Thank you, CMcG! Nostradamus, what the hell was that for?? If you despise me so much, why did you bother to answer any of my posts? If you think women like me: highly educated, kind, insightful and mature are a dime a dozen, let's see you do better. I haven't whinned about anything except for the fact that I'm scared of mice, and since I'm traditional, I don't date men who can't treat me to a nice dinner (not expensive, just reasonable)on the first date.

CMcG, thank you again!

Marion I don't talk about my children either. In fact when people ask me about them I say, "none that I know of," and leave it at that.

As a guy I'd be very leery of dating a woman with kids. She either focuses on them (which is good) and wouldn't have a lot of time for me. The other option is she doesn't focus on them, thats even worse.

If I had kids I'd probably look to date a single mom, simply because most single women wouldn't want the hassle of someone else's kid. There is also the added dimension of shared context. Someone who doesn't have them will never really understand the trials of someone who does.

Josh

Here are the rules according to TG (actively dating, while raising two teens). These only apply to divorced people, widows/widower is a different dynamic that I haven't put enough thought into.

1. I'd never date someone without children again, they have too much free time that I can't match and they don't get the next rule.

2. I'm never meeting her children in person and she's never meeting mine unil they are old enough to vote or at least drive, but voting age is preferable.

That's it, that's all you need to do to raise completely healthy kids. All opposite sex adults are a threat to their time and love from their parent. Grown up, divorced parents have one priority in life, if they seek a diversion or physical contact then discretion and privacy is the only way they can accomplish it. Most divorced parents share custody equally these days so it's easy to have two lives and keep them apart, having to confine all of your affection, adult companionship and sex into two or three days a week is completely workable and most married couples do that anyway. The best single mother's I've met share this philosiphy and the mother's that want to move in together/merge families/meet each other's kids aren't very good mothers anyways and end up not being the type of women I'd want my kids to meet. I've met a number of women over the years who seem to move in with a new guy every year or so and bring the kids along, having to move out when there is a fight or they realize they don't like each other. That's no way to establish the comfortable, solid place that a child calls "home."

Remember when I said that some men should never get married or allow their girlfriends to have kids? Well, there's a female corolary to that. Some single moms should never contemplate bringing another man in their lives until their kids are grown.

I got divorced when I was in my mid-30s and already had kids. I specifically sought out single moms to date because parenting skills were important to me and I wanted to see those skills in action before I committed. That, and I diodn't want to have to deal with a biological clock at some point in the future. We've been together for 17 years and it's been good for us. But I've seen other couples struggle.

Most guys are all about being fair and trying to treat kids in a blended family on as equal a basis as each kid will allow. Some kids naturally require more work and effort that others, but there still has to be a baseline to start from.

Many (not all) women are more about being nurturing and protective than they are about being fair and equitable and rational. I've seen several women struggle (and fail) at accepting some other woman's kids as being equals to her own. There are a lot of double standards out there, and that invariably causes a tremendous amount of damage.

The adults have to be the team and stand against all the kids equally. When it breaks down along bio-kid lines everyone loses. EVERYONE.

At best, raising a blended family requires additional coping skills, additional maturity and additional resources of all types. Just as not everyone is cut out to be a parent, not every parent is cut out to be a step-parent. Simple fact.

Here's the question you should be asking yourself - are you looking for a co-parent to help you raise your kids according to your shared values, or are you merely looking to fill a hole in your own personal life? If it's the former then maybe you'll have the interest to learn how to raise a blended family. If it's the latter then bringing a guy into your household will only serve to divide your time and your loyalties to your own kids. You'd be doing everyone a huge favor by exercising some restraint.

not personally in this situation, but coming from divorced parents, I'd have to agree with TG's stance. Actually made lotsa sense to me.

My mom (who we lived with) dated a bit while I was in my teens, but not much, she really didn't have time between working and raising us. My dad's another story I won't go into...but the stability of 'home' is so crucial, just as TG has pointed out...

Marion!

I haven't visited for awhile, I see you're still stirring the pot. I think your question is valid, and although I generally don't agree with many of your views, I don't think it is selfish to reject a suitor due to kids - even if you have them - though it is odd, as it seems you would easily relate. The only issue is that most single men w/o kids will flat out reject dating you due to your kids.

As for my experiences, when I was younger, I dated a few women with children, and I always felt akward around them. It is difficult to really get to know someone when their kids are present, as starting a relationship is time-intensive and both parties usually want undivided attention. When it was just the two of us, I would think about her not being at home with her children... Kind of a catch-22, plus its hard to look a kid in the face after nailing their mom... I think most single men (and women) are looking for a potential partner to either date casually for fun, or if more serious, to start a family anew, both of which preclude kids to some degree. Although I had a friend who married a woman with two kids and cared for them as his own.

Also, one could construe your not wanting to date a man with children as a dislike of children in general, which could subjectively be labeled "scary". Thus, the only viable solution is that you date a single man who shares your same views. The only one that comes to mind is davelj...

Watch out! I got really attached to the mom and the kids for four years and then had to finally throw the towel on the mom and me.We were two idiots together. We did not marry though so that was good. It meant the end of pretty strong bonds with kids too. It was like breaking up with my family. Awful experience. Careful guys and gals. I think the kids are better of for knowing me because I treated them better than either of their biological parents did IMO.
Still it would probably have been better if she were a good single mom a la temeculaguy's model.

eccen in esc
cheese, I wish we could just stick to housing and economics on this website, I suggest reading Dr. Laura for you, Marion.

Yes it is selfish! I could go on but why bother

I know it's selfish.

I think out loud a lot. It tends to help clarify my thought on certain issues. Some of that thinking ends up in topics here on Piggington.

Cooperthedog, while I appreciate your perspective, your comment about me being anti-kid like davelj is incorrect. Raising 3 or 4, etc. with the two of my own would be a bit much for me right now. Hence my nervousness when I am approached by single dads. It's normal. I was recently approached, he had 3 young kids. Honestly, I couldn't deal. I would prefer to be cautious, thing things through thoroughly and identify my limitations than rush in and ruin somebody's life.

bugs: Here's the question you should be asking yourself - are you looking for a co-parent to help you raise your kids according to your shared values, or are you merely looking to fill a hole in your own personal life? If it's the former then maybe you'll have the interest to learn how to raise a blended family. If it's the latter then bringing a guy into your household will only serve to divide your time and your loyalties to your own kids. You'd be doing everyone a huge favor by exercising some restraint.

I like what you had to say, Bugs and I agree completely. I HAVE asked myself that question, I just haven't answered yet. :)

I actually like TG's philosophy. Since my boys don't see anyone I choose to date anyway unless it turns serious (and it hasn't so far), I'm already living that philosophy. Like another poster pointed out, it does make sense.

I enjoy reading the different perspective on this topic.

Marion, nice comments, and it is o.k. to think aloud and ask for advice, the fact that you think about it puts you ahead of the curve.

But my theory is not a temporary one until you get serious with someone, you need to keep it that way even if you do get serious with someone. If he's worth his salt, he'll deal with seeing you a few days a week until you kids are grown, depending on the age of the kids that may only be the length of a car loan and a lot of "serious" relationships still fall apart after a year or two. I am completely upfront about it when meeting a new woman, I make no bones about it, I mention that I will not see them on holidays, I use my vacation time with my kids and I won't be answering the phone on the days and the hours I'm with my kids, final answer (never give out the house number, just the cell and throw it on vibrate during homework and dinner). It has a nice side effect of screening out the flakes, the gold diggers and the divorced women not happy with their new lifestyle economically as a single. I call it "psuedo-prostitute repellent." It eliminates those that need me and leaves me with those that want me. I don't mind having to get a new girlfriend when they can't deal with it, that is actually my favorite part. It's a win/win and it is a lifestyle you need to commit to for the long haul. If you find someone that fits into that lifestyle, great, if you end up dating dozens of people before that last kid goes to college, that's great too.

TG, I like this post like your other one. I have a question: If you've been dating one person for awhile, why the objection to the kids seeing her on holidays? When someone is dating more than one person, the reason is obvious. So, I'm curious about that restriction, especially since your kids are older.

Wow, TG, I really like the way you handle this. I think it is very, very smart. It matches the way we thought of things: kids are a 20-year commitment and our world revolved around them until they were grown. It pays off in the long run - my kids have turned out beautifully and have both stated that they really appreciate the way we raised them.

It scared my wife while our life was so kid-centric - she has told me she was afraid we wouldn't adapt well as a couple when they left. She now knows those fears were unfounded.

One thing I will say on this topic: it amazed me how many families with single moms used me, married with kids of my own, as a surrogate dad for the kids. I didn't particularly mind and they had great kids, but I hadn't really anticipated it happening. It appears that when kids get to be 7 or 8, they really need a dad. I'm not smart enough to know why, but I saw it repeated several times. It seemed to be more of an issue with only childs, but not exclusively.

What I did have a problem with is when many of the single moms, later on, got clown bfs. I had grown attached to those kids and to watch some idiot buffoon his way through raising them drove me bonkers. This makes me think that TG's method of keeping his kids entirely separate from his new relationships - however long term they are - is spot on. There is a chance they will like this new adult in their life, but they may also see it as interference in what's left of their family cocoon. Nice work, TG. Kids first.

This may seem like a contradiction (I say kids need a father figure at age 7 or 8, then say keeping bfs separate is a good thing), but it's not: I think the kids of single moms picked me, not the single moms. Big difference. Once the single moms noticed what was going on, they encouraged the relationship.

Life has many unexpected curves so I don't fault those previously married single moms for being single. Sh!t happens. But what makes smoke come out my ears is when I hear of a single woman getting pregnant intentionally on her own so she can raise the child sans father. After my experience the last couple of decades, I think that is the most selfish and wrong thing she could do. And those kids will point out this glaring mistake 7 or 8 years down the road - and potentially even harbor bad feelings towards her for depriving them of a parent intentionally.

While your post may appear selfish and a bit hipocritical at first (having your own kids but hesitating if a guy has his own), that kind of blunt honesty is what all those kids deserve. At least you are thinking about the fact that he has kids, rather than not giving it any attention, which is indeed selfish. So I don't fault you for your view for that reason.

When I dated, if I met a woman with kids, I would not want to meet those kids until I felt it could be serious. Single moms are sacred. I would never just casually date a single mom. While I think you are dating her AND her kids, the risk of they becomming attached to a surrogate parent (depending on whether their dad is still in their lives) is significant. If it became serious, then I would need to realize that I am entering a relationship with them just as much as their mom. Some people are not ready for that, whether they have their own kids or not. Step parenting is no walk in the park.

If I were a single dad, and a woman hestitated if I had kids, I would want her to tell me and move on and would appreciate her for it doing so.

TG's approach is a very noble one. Not many people can do that.

I agree with those who say most people can not do what TG suggest or does. It helps if you don't want a very significant relationship of course. I never could do it with someone I felt was important in my life. I like companionship too much and would want to involve someone in my socials circles. Going slowly would probably be the best compromise.

Hats of to Bugs and people like he and his wife. I think of this as a heroic success!

I am finding it hard enough raising my own kid (just one) while staying married in a stable household. I come here and am amazed to see how folks cope with even more complex situations.

"Your thoughts?"

That your hypocrisy has no bounds.

You expect someone to accept YOUR kids but you won't date someone who has them?

God help the next person that ends up at an alter with you....

As soon as I saw this topic I knew who had posted it. Surely you have better things to do than waste valuable internet bandwidth on this nonsense. What a bore!

Marion,
Looks or no looks,
Money or no money,
Kids or no kids,

If the chick is wacked

Run don't walk.

aldante,

stick a fork in me

Just an observation that's related to this topic.

I have a friend who's now 40-ish who lived in San Diego for about a decade. She was married, had a kid and got divorced when she was maybe 32. Two years ago she left San Diego and moved to Savannah, Georgia. She had reasons besides relationship (or lack thereof) issues for moving, but I'll paraphrase her thoughts on dating in Southern California as a single mom in her late-30s, which she shared with me. For a little context, this woman is fairly attractive, takes care of herself and had invested in some surgical "enhancements." She turned heads.

Anyhow, paraphrasing: "The problem with dating here [San Diego] is that most of the guys that I want to have a relationship with have too many options. For example, I really like [Name Withheld]. He's 46 but he can date some hot 28-year old that doesn't have a kid or a care in the world. So I have to compete with a lot of younger women with no kids AND all of the women who are in a similar situation to myself. My potential dating pool just gets older. [Name Withheld]'s dating pool just gets bigger because he can still date younger women if he wants to. It's not fair."

She was generalizing, of course. But there's more than a grain of truth in her observation. Anyhow, she moved to Savannah, married a cop and I assume they're both happy campers.

The point is that Southern California is a very difficult dating market, and particularly for women as they pass 40. The competition is fierce.

There is truth in the above with the caveat that a woman over 30's success in dating lies in her confidence, level of attractiveness and what she brings to the table substance wise. That is IF her dating pool contains men that are mature, successful and decent. Let me explain what I mean by decent. I'll give you an example, I dated a man who presented himself to be the type of man that I would consider for a relationship, which is basically one who has substance. However, before too long it was apparent that he was a sleaze. To make the explanation brief, I told him what I was into and in order to gain my approval/date me, he claimed he was into the same kind of things and shared a similar outlook on life. That wasn't true. His lying earned him an instant "dump". Another thing about the sleaze factor, I found out he liked dating women with luscious asses, which was part of his attraction to me. I wasn't impressed.

Ok, I veered from my point a bit, the giggolos, mid-life crisis gents, and men without substance bounce around with the 28-year-olds with surgically enhanced features.

There are men in the 35 and older category which is the category I'm interested in that know what they want and it's a woman with a little more going for her, in terms of maturity, maybe education, outlook on life. Those are the men I accept dates from.

The competition may be fierce, but I'm not even aware of the competition. And there is no arrogance in that viewpoint. When I date, I approach it in a casual manner. There is no urgency. My belief is if someone is right for you, you will know it and things will fall into place.

Continuing my post...Sex is easy to be had, by younger men, by older men. That is true for any woman who is attractive. However, the younger guys continually seek me out because as I've heard by some, they're tired of the immaturity and games played by the younger women. Another thing is they want to know if they "can keep up". I'm 42, but thankfully I look a lot younger due in part to my ethnicity and my genes. I'm thankful for that. That's another reason why I get approached from that group.

Again, if it's for sex, than that's fine. In general, I'm not interested in anything serious from that group. I don't want to be anyone's mother (in terms of taking care of anyone) and I think it goes without saying, in order for anything to be remotely serious, the ability to have a meaningful conversation has to be present along with shared goals and values.

Also where you congrugate to meet people is important if you're looking for a mate. I have girlfriends who are attractive and I know some attractive women who go to bars in hopes of meeting men. However, if a woman goes to a bar, what kind of man is she going to meet? She may meet someone nice with good values, but there are going to be many men there who are just looking for sex.

P.S. While I'm on a reflective roll, the ridiculous comments from some on here are starting to get old. Aldante, plain idiotic. Also, from Nostradamus, who most likely got turned down for a date at the beach, which if his personality is any indication, will probably be a common occurence.

Marion, I differ with your conclusion that a man is sleaze if "...part of his attraction to ..." a woman is their "...luscious asses."

"Another thing about the sleaze factor, I found out he liked dating women with luscious asses, which was part of his attraction to me."

What if "part" of his attraction to you was a different part of your anatomy? Say your face for instance? Or your breasts - either big, medium, or small?

So if it is your face that attracts a man then why is that less "sleaze" then if it is your behind that attracts a man? I like to look at my wife's ass. Her behind attracts me. It gets me turned on. I've been married for 20+ years. And my wife's ass still turns me on.

That is a big part of attraction for me as a man to a woman. What's wrong with that?

One more thing - men are visual. They get turned on by the visual. Women get turned on by the emotional. You might find some exceptions here and there on both sides but on average I think those are true statements. That's just the way we're built. It's in our genes.

Regarding what turns on my wife about me - it's not my body. Although I do still try to keep myself in shape. I know that if I want a good life (sex, companionship, respect, enjoyable time together) with my wife then I need to show not only affection physically and verbally toward her but more importantly with my actions. What have I done for her lately ?

It's often doing things for her that I don't even see the importance of. And when she sees that I am trying to change my habits or behaviors for her sake - and not my own - then that pleases her. There's pleasing your spouse and then there's pleasing your marriage - and that's learning how to compromise. Not on everything but on the big things. So that you - she and I - function as a team.

(Sorry, I got a little off track in my own thoughts. :)

Wow! I think we have hit bottom.