I am ever grateful to have shared 4+ decades married to my late husband. He was a wonderful man and I was lucky.
I would not trade those years, but if I could, I would wish that he had not been ill for 25 years and progressively more disabled over the last 15. That is time I will never get back. And lost opportunities to share with a partner the experiences that you hope for as money and time become more available. Had those years progressed as most couples hope, I would not now feel the need to break free and explore what I missed.

Positive advances in the last couple of days.

I had an opportunity to have that in person conversation with man #1. It was not as difficult as expected. He has no objection to circular dating as described here, with the understanding that he is my only intimate partner. He understands and supports my need to explore who I am and what I want. And appreciates that I was honest and open with him. No jealousy. We agreed that he may choose to have similar relationships with other women. I left it to him to decide if he wants to know if I'm seeing someone else and the status of those relationships.

I had similar messaging convos with men #2 and #3. They agree to my terms as dating without intimacy. At least, that's what they claim now. Those online relationships (?) will be progressing to in person when possible. Again, darn Covid makes things difficult, but may have the benefit of taking things slowly.

Nancy - I came from the same circumstances you did.

Metastatic cancer doomed my wife and effed up our marriage for the past 10 years of her debilitation.

To a degree, I feel the same way you do; we missed a lot of living with our beloved spouses over the past decade or so.

We have a lot of catching up to do.

But it's a much uglier dating landscape than it was back when you and I started our married lives.

Today's first date expectations (for either sex) are pretty much what you and I remember our wedding night expectations were back then. And this attitude even extends down to middle schoolers.

It might be saner for you to be up-front and tell your selected entourage that you only want an FWB relationship and that no one plays without protection.

Absolutely enforce that rule! No excuses no matter who the guy is. Today's STDs make the **** in 1969 South Viet Nam look like the sniffles.

That way, all your guys know - from the very definition of FWB - that they get their anonymous at-bat with you. And you can eventually separate the wheat from the chaff.

Consider yourself lucky in that as a woman, you have the easy FWB option.

Us guys can't typically set up such an up-front offer to a string of ladies. You ladies would clamor that men are pigs and that your'e here for serious relationships and children and marriage instead.

I have had NO one worth a **** want to try and get a leg over...
If by "lucky" you mean "in that as a woman, you have the easy FWB option"..."lucky" only applies if the guy is a drunk, meth addict, homeless, or some other absolute nope.
At least in my world...those are the only ones that have ever offered.
(not that i asked them..they just volunteered)

And, no..I do not hang around people like that...I merely said those have been the only type to offer.

Sounds good, Nancy! And like I said, if you don't make a big deal out of it, men won't either. So many men 'complain' that all a woman wants is to get married asap and they don't, so I think it might actually be a relief that you're not like that.
It's often we women ourselves who are awkward about suggesting or doing circular dating as we feel guilty, as if we owe something to people we don't even know yet and the other hasn't even committed either.
Much of how dating goes really hinges on how we ourselves present things, how we behave. You showed confidence. That's great!
Good luck to you. You got baws, lady. You'll get there!

I am available

"Am I being unrealistic to think that men will accept a non exclusive relationship?

Sex is possibly the biggest barrier. It would be unsafe and unfair to have more than one sexual relationship at a time. If I set that boundary on one person, that could be a deal breaker and make the whole question moot anyway."


Men will be happy to entertain a non-exclusive relationship, just ** be upfront ** with it so they know that they are just one of several candidates.

All grown adult men should already know that anyway; women operate from a position of abundant men, and so she is automatically expected to have several orbiting her at any given time. (OTOH... if exclusivity enters the discussion, it gets complicated as the selected one expects to be the only one.)

And yes, sex will possibly be the biggest barrier to you maintaining your sanity.

You need to declare to all in your dating circle that there is NO SEX at all as you are seeing others and you are not sure yet who you want to settle down with.

If the grown men know that it is a fair and level playing field, they will be OK. But understand that men and women are jealous creatures; sooner or later one or more of your guys will suspect that "someone" in your circle is "getting it", and they will start leaving the game and look elsewhere.

If you do start to dabble in sex while in your dating circle -- be sure that you demand condoms from all of them as that is the only safe thing to do nowadays.
Men will be fine in an FWB as long as they know they are getting their turn at the ** benefits ** and all are playing by the same rules. That whole level playing field thing again.

Howdy Bluegrass!!

What I meant was simply this:

Men can't get away with putting "Looking for an FWB only at this time" and expect ANY level of success. (Someone step in and prove me wrong, as I'll start using that!)

If a guy puts in his profile "Looking for an FWB only at this time" (and doesn't look like Brad Pitt in profile pics) any/most woman reading the profile will call him a pig.



OTOH - risks of meth-heads responding aside, a gal will get INUNDATED with replies to her profile request for "Looking for an FWB only at this time". Regardless of her profile pics.
She will be seen as a modern, liberated, sex-positive woman who knows what she wants.

It is not a level playing field in OLD between the sexes.

That is the funniest thing I have read so far this year..
In all my years of dating..even when I was younger, thinner, "all that and a biscuit" (as they say here)..I never had "several orbiting" me..
From the time I was 20 until *now*..nope, that has NEVER been the case with me.

Just tossing that out there to remind guys that "not *all* women".....

You do know that you are projecting your own undigested stuff here? And with that showing your mental/emotional state?

As for your argument: the playing field has always been a man's game until women began to take their power and personal rights and freedom back in the 60s. We're still not there.
Funny you only look at the aspect of sex and not see the whole picture.

As for sex, there's thousands of men who only want sex sex sex. Let's say there's 1000 men who want sex only -and often they're involved even!-, then there's only 1 woman wanting the same.
Meaning there's 999 women who want a meaningful connection and while searching the right one to have that with, they take care of their own needs.
So it's not like we have it easy, the cause is that many men are only focused on sex and we are not. That is the only reason it is easier for a woman to find a sexual partner.
If you men would be like us -looking for something meaningful- it'd be different.
Don't blame us for your sexual obsessions.

Ummm, who has a sexual obsession?
Sweetie, aside from coming off as incredibly judgey..*I* meant ~dating~....
Yes, I *did* make a comment in regard to someone saying women can get sex anytime they want, as *I* have personally not found that to be true...

And, in my last example you took out of context was to the comment Skip made that women " so she is automatically expected to have several orbiting her at any given time."
And that THAT has no been my experience either, ever..
And that had nothing to o with sex.


I am not "projecting" anything..
When one merely relates what they have seen and experienced in their life, and how everyone is different, and has different experiences, that is not "projecting"...and to claim that because they differ from this person or that person is flawed, damaged, or wrong, or what YOU (the generic you) THINK they should be this or that way (because that is how you are and what works for *you..that *is* judgemental..and WRONG..

See also, I wasn't talking to *you*....but to Skip, and what he said.
See also: I wasn't aware God had spoken to you directly and that you were an Ascended Master™ whom God has granted the ability to speak for all and tell others how they should act or believe.
But, if He has, I apologize.

Who stepped on your toes? I wasn't addressing you.

It's doable but may not be worth the effort if your just after numbers. Keep it honest to preserve feelings.

I realize it’s probably futile to say, but a modern, liberated, sex-positive woman
who knows what she wants (as you put it), IMO, regards herself as more than
a sex-object (liberated) and while she can be very sensual (sex-positive)
she chooses to look for more fulfillment in a relationship that’s worth it (modern).

Howdy Bluegrass!

Not sure why you refuse to believe this. Don't just look at your own situation, but look at the bigger picture of which you are now a part of.

(And note that the below anecdotes are ** in generalities **, and not specific.)

Take any gal with great looks and put her on an OLD site and she is going to get inundated. She doesn't even need a profile, just a good pic. Take her homely sister under the same conditions, not so much love..

Forget OLD for a minute; Rosie O'Donnel and Jen Aniston walk into a bar; who is turning the heads?

The hot one - a man or woman - will ALWAYS have lots of options to pick and choose from. From prom dates in HS to dating and marriage choices.


Women

The hot gal's on easy street until her sexual marketplace value - hotness measure - drops to that of her less attractive counterpart. The old saw: Women age like milk, men age like wine. (No, I didn't make that up; aging hollywood men still get roles, aging hollywood women get walk-ons.)

The gal can stay in the game as she ages by lowering her standards, dating men she normally wouldn't have glanced at otherwise.


Men

Same is true for a hot man; a hot guy doesn't even need a profile (or much of one), just good pics. Happens every minute on every OLD site.

But the hot guy isn't off scott-free in all of this.

As he ages, he still has to work HARD to take care of himself and maintain his SMV among the women he wants.

That said, if he is still hot and in the game, he is not out here dating the 50's plus gals, but rather their daughters.

True that!

Peace to both of you, we all know the quoting function here isn't the best.

Anyway...

"As for your argument: the playing field has always been a man's game until women began to take their power and personal rights and freedom back in the 60s. We're still not there.
Funny you only look at the aspect of sex and not see the whole picture.

As for sex, there's thousands of men who only want sex sex sex. Let's say there's 1000 men who want sex only -and often they're involved even!-, then there's only 1 woman wanting the same.
Meaning there's 999 women who want a meaningful connection and while searching the right one to have that with, they take care of their own needs.
So it's not like we have it easy, the cause is that many men are only focused on sex and we are not. That is the only reason it is easier for a woman to find a sexual partner.
If you men would be like us -looking for something meaningful- it'd be different.
Don't blame us for your sexual obsessions."

Warning: Use of women, men, "you", "them", "they", "mankind" below are for speaking in generalities, OK?

Your use of feminist terms like "taking your power back" speaks volumes from the direction of which you come from.

No man "took your power away" to begin with.

Physical attacks aside, gals have always had "the power" to close their thighs.

Women control sex, men control relationships.

Once mankind civilized the world the mating game changed. The mating game playing field has never been level since. A woman is born with the OEM gear that every man wants. She controls sex. And Yes, most any healthy man wants sex.

Men can have and enjoy sex far beyond in years than what a woman can. Men can continue to fertilize and procreate long after a women has, well, let's say "lost interest" for politeness.

See Mick Jagger for instance.
See also why older men chase younger women; Pro Tip: it ain't for the convo...

So while an aging woman is happy with an evening of Matlock, Murder She Wrote, a guy still wants to couch wrassle, by the light of the TV.

But its not just the physical of the ejaculation, the men love to be loved; the cuddling, hugging, kissing, the romance; the mind-meld of two people wrapped up in each other - while Matlock solves a case.
(This is why a man who exchanged hearts with his gal eons ago (back when Matlock and Murder She Wrote were first-run series) can still be mad about her - even at many pounds and wrinkles later - it wasn't ALL about the penetration, it was about their connection...).


There probably isn't a man on this board (or a woman who is honest about human relationships) that doesn't agree that sex in the relationship (however you define the word) is important.

The notion that sex is \Quote more important to men \EndQuote is because men still enjoy and want sex as their age advances moreso than does the woman.

Again; this is why men chase younger women. Older women who decide to go celibate can't complain when their date bounces after a few dates if there is no intimacy in their romance, or worse; no romance at all.

hye