Hacker News Reader

Comment by 8f2ab37a-ed6c | Hacker News Reader

In the US, is it concerning when a "grown man" in his 30s or 40s and beyond still lives with roommates, when dating and trying to attract a mate? Is there an expectation that you should be displaying a certain lifestyle that will attract a partner, and if you're living with a bunch of roommates, you're failing to do that?

I believe that's not the case in many other countries in the world, but what about the US?

View on HN

It depends on what you want to do with your life, and what kind of partner you want. Most people want to date someone with their own place, because most people want their own place. If you want to live in a communal living situation, you're not going to be very happy if you partner up with someone who wants their own place. Will you sacrifice communal living in order to gain a partner? Or will you look for a partner who is interested in communal living, even if that takes longer?

These conversations about how men have to change themselves in order to find a partner are funny to me, because the subtext is that partnering up is the most important thing you can achieve, and you should sacrifice your other interests in order to make yourself marketable to the largest pool of people, so you can find a partner as soon as possible. People mock the phrase "just be yourself" because there are some things (money, physical beauty) that most people are looking for, and if you achieve them it's easier to find a partner. But the flip side is, unless you enjoy putting in all the work to be rich and beautiful, having a partner won't make you happy. The phrase "just be yourself" is really saying that you shouldn't change yourself just to find a partner, because it will be a phyrric victory. Instead, you should be yourself, do the things that make you happy, and let that filter out all the people who would only be interested in your money or your beauty. (and to be clear, this is not an argument against self improvement - you should still seek to better yourself)

i make it a point to be myself because i want my partner and my friends to accept me the way i am. i use it as a filter to weed out people who are looking for something else even if that makes finding friends more difficult. that doesn't mean i don't change things. but those are things i don't mind changing or things that help me to be a better person. (eg. i started to shave once i went to china, because in china people generally don't have beards, and having one makes you look old, but some time after i got married i started to grow a small beard again, even though my wife didn't like it because i preferred it that way)

There's not such thing as a permanent fixed identity though. "Just be yourself" raises a more interesting question. Who is yourself? Why is that way? Why should it be that way? Have you reflected on why you want what you want or why you behave the way you do? Do you think the way you are is the way you should be? Or is there a cognitive disconnect between the is and ought?

This is 100% true, which is why it's so important to resist the societal pressure to conform. It might be tempting to avoid these questions by taking the "default" path, but that path is unlikely to lead to happiness. You have to decide on your own path and work to make it happen.

Yes but also it's important to critically engage with reality as well. Many people think they are constructing some original identity without testing it against reality. No plan survives battle.

Especially in high cost areas like NY or SF, it’s completely normal for adults, even highly successful ones, to have roommates. I personally know plenty of men who had roommates up until they moved in with the person they would end up marrying.

In the cities I've lived, this is standard yes. For better or for worse, a man that isn't displaying capability to provide for himself is typically less attractive than one who is. Again, this is my experience. I'm not making an argument for or against.

The US is a huge and diverse country. People in it have diverse expectations.

It’s also going to depend on the location. Having roommates in a very high cost city is no big deal at all.

If "displaying a certain lifestyle" means the person gets to visit a much larger home (as there's more incomes), get surrounded with lots of friends (since it's a vibrant community in the house), who all have stock portfolios to retire early on because of it (since they're saving an extra $1k+ a month by sharing the better living situation), then you'll probably be be able to find someone who finds that more appealing than the alternative (a loner who's spare money gets burned up going to a landlord or mortgage bank interest payments). Alternatively, if you look at folks attracted to the "drowning in credit card debt, but leasing a brand new BMW, and downtown apartment" version of "displaying a certain lifestyle" then no, those people probably will be repelled. The dating pool is full of unique people of varying philosophy, intelligence, and wisdom.

Yes, it is financially concerning. You do not need to own a house, but you do need to show you are financially responsible enough to pay for rent, utilities, etc all by yourself.

I would argue that living with roommates may be harder than living alone, from a financial responsibility point of view. You not only need to be responsible for yourself but you need to deal with roommates which may not be.

Of course, you could be the financially irresponsible roommate, but I think your date can figure this out quite rapidly then, based on how much your roommates will hate you ;)

Good point, additionally, how do you expect the relationship to grow if you are not unable to unfortunately secure basic private lodging?

Most women might be fine with this arrangement while casually dating in younger years but I have yet to see anyone being at ease in this situation.

Don't forget that we are talking about 30+ years old, at this age most people are looking for something stable, of course you can always find exceptions but your available pool of candidates shrinks.

Oh, I fully agree that people ok with this arrangement beyond 30 years are rare. But if that’s who a person is, why should they give it up? They should keep searching for the soulmate that is also ok with this arrangement.

This type of shared apartments also have the effect of creating a sort of microcosm of people thinking alike on this specific topic. You tend to get to know other such shared apartments. This changes drastically the odds of finding partner ok with this arrangement.

Source: I lived 5 years in different such shared apartments, the microcosm effect really was insane, I automatically got to know the friends of my roommates, half of whom lived in a shared apartment, then I got to know their roommates, etc. 3 of my relationships started because of this network.

I dunno - having some social proof that a person can actually live with other people successfully is also a helpful kind of indicator.

Depends on the situation. Generally I would say yes but I also know of successful people who have roomates (and can thus afford larger and cooler accommodations) and those people can of course throw parties and potlucks easier.

If you live in a shithole by yourself obviously that's not going to be attractive

There are such things as intentional communities. I predict multi-adult households will make a comeback. The era of nuclear families is coming to an end. It takes a village to raise children.

Maybe ask some actual women instead of random men in tech?

Absolutely. All else being equal, a man over the age of 30 without his own residence is basically undatable (as per unsaid expectations in the US).

Treating this as a universal standard of women for men is probably more harmful to anyone's dating chances than having roommates or not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com