[edit: Some of the women didn’t like this one. I gave a trigger warning, but they still got triggered. Part of that was my fault – I should’ve known better than to post this on female-dominated forums. It went over like a turd in a punchbowl. But let me issue the trigger warning up front: if you get offended when a man discusses his standards for LTRs and assigns low probabilities to the women in his area meeting them, don’t read further. For the rest, don’t take my estimates personally. They aren’t about you; they’re about me and my criteria. I’m just using myself as an illustration of how the process works.]

Overview  

I’m 62, and I’ve been contentedly single now for over a decade. I’m not interested in getting into a serious, long-term romantic relationship (LTR) at this stage in my life. However, if I were interested in getting into an LTR, I know that the chances of me finding a “good fit” for a partner in my area and age range would be infinitesimally small. I know that in two ways – through my own experience and by estimating the probabilities.

I’m going to talk about the second approach, the probability estimate, because I haven’t heard it mentioned elsewhere. Everyone knows the first approach – you make an intuitive, gut assessment, based on your experience with women in your area and age range, maybe supplemented with the experience of others. That’s fine. It’s a valid way to answer the question, and no doubt it’s the preferred method for most people.

I would like to introduce you to another method, though, one that uses simple math to estimate the probability that a woman who is a “good fit” for you exists in your area and age range. I like playing with numbers, so this method appeals to me. I figured that other people, at least the analytical types, might find it interesting.

If, like me, you aren’t looking to get into an LTR, just pretend for a moment that you are. Then ask yourself, “What would the probability be of me finding a woman in my area and age range who meets my standards for a good LTR?”   

When I’ve used this method, I have found the results both amusing and helpful.  Amusing because the numbers were so absurdly tiny. And helpful because they confirmed my experience; they validated what I already knew. They also helped me discard any occasional, residual curiosity about whether there is a special someone out there for me, hiding under a rock, and in that way, it saved me some time and energy.

The math is simple, and the process is straightforward.  It involves three steps:

1. Calculate the number of available single women in your area and age range. 
2. Estimate the probability that those women will meet each of your standards.
3. Multiply the results of step one with each of the probabilities from step two. 

The final result is an estimate of the likelihood that you will find a “good fit” for an LTR – someone who meets your standards – within your area and age range.

By the way, an important caveat: this method does not take into account the other person’s standards, only your own. It gives you the probability of a woman meeting your standards. Whether you meet her standards is another issue. So this method produces an optimistic over-estimate of the actual chances of a good LTR.  You can always try to factor in her standards later, if you like.

I’ll walk you through the process, using myself as an example. 

Trigger Warning

This is bound to offend women. I’m a man, and I will be talking about my standards for an LTR partner. I will be talking about how the single women in my age range and city fall short of my standards. Although it is not my intent to criticize women, I know some women will inevitably see this as hating on women. I can’t help that. I’m not going to tippy toe around everything just to avoid offending a few women.

If you tend to get upset when you hear men talk about their standards for women, and god forbid how women don’t meet those standards, then save yourself the aggravation and stop reading. Go do something else.  

For the rest of you, don’t take my estimates personally. I’m just using myself to illustrate the process. My numbers aren’t an objective assessment of all women, or even an objective assessment of the women in my age range and area. They are subjective estimates, based on my subjective criteria, subjective judgment, and subjective experience with the women in my age range and city. I’m a unique man in a unique situation. Other people will have very different estimates.

Ok, enough waffling.    

---

Step One:  Number of Available Women

The first step is to figure out how many women are available to you as potential LTR partners, within your age range and geographic area.  This is not hard to figure out.  You will need the following:

1. The number of women in your area
2. Percentage of people within your age range (however you define that)
3. Percentage of people who are “single” – that is, neither married nor in a relationship
4. Percentage of those single people who are looking for a relationship

The first number is easy enough.  Google the population in your area, then divide by two for the number of women.  If you want to get more precise, you can use the actual percentage of women (e.g., 51.5% of the US population is female). 

The second number can be found easily via google search.  Just type in “Percentage of US [or whatever country] population between [whatever your age range is] years old.” 

The third number can be a little tricky, because the word “single” can mean different things.  “Single” can mean simply unmarried, yet either cohabiting or in a serious LTR.  We aren’t interested in that kind of “single” person.  We want the “singles” who are neither married nor in a relationship. 

For that, google, “Pew Research Profile of Single Americans.”  Pew uses good survey methods, and they also use our preferred definition of “single” (not married, cohabiting, or in a relationship).  Granted, this is US data, but if you are in another Western country, you can probably use these as rough estimates. 

That same Pew Research poll will also give you the fourth number – percentage of singles who are looking for a relationship.  This is important to take into account, since just because someone is single doesn’t mean they are looking for a relationship.  And if they aren’t looking, they aren’t a candidate.  As you’ll see in that poll, only about half of singles are looking for a relationship.  If you want to get more precise, the poll breaks it down further by age and gender. 

Once you have those numbers, it’s a simple matter of just multiplying it out.  The number of women multiplied by the percentages in 2, 3, and 4. 

Example

I live in a moderately small city, population 172,000.  Divide by two, and there means there are 86,000 women in my area.  I’m not interested in traveling far for a relationship. I am 62, and I consider my normal dating range about 45 to 60 years old. I could go a bit younger, but not much, not without feeling uncomfortable. The percentage of people that fall within that age range is 21.4%. 

Pew Research tells me that the percentage of people who are single in that age range is 31%. Pew also tells me that roughly half of them are looking for a relationship.  When you multiply 86,000 by 0.214, 0.31, and 0.50, you get 2850. 

So, there are 2850 available single women in my age range and area who are potential LTR candidates for me.     

Not bad, right?  Well, not so fast…   

---

Step Two: Standards

Here is where the rubber meets the road and the women get offended. 

First, we need to define terms.  I am using “standards” in a narrow sense, different than how you might normally hear it used.  When I say “standards,” I mean essential criteria that must be met, or else the woman gets crossed off your list as an LTR candidate.  “Standards” are deal-breakers.  Standards are different than preferences – things you’d like to have but are negotiable, or nice bonuses, but not essential.  Standards are qualities that you will not do without, if you going to enter an LTR.  If any of your standards are not met, you would walk away – assuming you want a good, lasting, flourishing LTR and not just any old LTR.  Standards are “must haves” (or “must not haves”). 

Step Two is easy enough to describe:

1. Identify your standards (“musts” that are relatively independent; see below)
2. Estimate the percentage of women in your age range and area that meet each standard
3. Multiply the figure from Step One (number of available women) by these percentages.

You are multiplying the percentages together because that is how combined probability works. Each of the individual standards must be met concurrently.

The result is what you are looking for – the number of women in your area and age range who meet your standards. 

Guidelines

For the purposes of the probability calculations, you need to frame your standards in a way that they are relatively independent of each other.  That is, there should not be a lot of dependency, overlap, or redundancy between the standards. Otherwise, the calculations will be thrown off. For example, if one of your standards is, “She should be intelligent,” and another standard is, “She should be interesting to talk to,” those standards have too much overlap.  They cover too much of the same territory, and one is partly dependent on the other.  Those two standards need to be collapsed into a single standard. Otherwise, the calculations will be off. So try to keep your standards relatively independent of each other (I say “relatively,” because it’s impossible to eliminate all dependency).

This step relies on subjective estimates. We can’t google these questions and get correct answers.  These will be your own subjective estimates, based on your experience and judgment.

Don’t get too fussy about precision. We are just just looking for ballpark estimates here. We aren’t expecting you to come up with exact figures. We are just looking for your best guess. Yes, we are working with numbers, but this is not a precise mathematical calculation. It’s just a ballpark estimate, that’s all.

It’s not an objective analysis, either.  It is inherently subjective, from top to bottom. This will not produce an objective, mathematical truth.  Your standards are subjective. Your values are subjective. Your experience with women is subjective. Your estimates of the percentage of women who meet your standards is subjective. It’s all subjective. So although we are using numbers, I don’t want to pretend that we are dealing with some kind of objective quantification here. This is a highly subjective analysis.  

Example

I’ll use myself to illustrate.  Again, don’t take my estimates personally or as an assertion of objective truth. These are just my ballpark estimates – my best guesses – based on my experience with the women in my city, in my age range. I’m 62 and have a number of unique – some might say eccentric – personality traits, beliefs, and standards. Other people will have very different numbers. I’m just using myself as a way to illustrate the process.

Below are listed 9 standards I have for an LTR partner – things I need in order for it to be a “good fit” for me. Next to each standard is my estimate of the percentage of women in my area and age range that meet that standard. 

1. Physically attractive enough to motivate the work involved. (7%)
2. Sufficient psychological and interpersonal maturity. Lack of significant psychological, emotional, or relational problems.  (10%) 
3. Good-enough personality fit – referring here to normal personality traits, such as introversion, curiosity, analytic temperament, etc., not to the “abnormal” ones mentioned in the last item. (20%)
4. Not a lot of men have passed through her gates. (10%) 
5. Not a single momma, unless the kids are well into adulthood and independent.  (10%)
6. Intelligent, deep thinker, curious, independent thinker. Mentally interesting. (10%)
7. Similarity in core values (5%)
8. Enough similarity in worldview – by which I mean views on politics, cultural issues, and spirituality or religion.  (10%)
9. Not interested in marriage or cohabitation. (10%)

***

Final Result

The final step is to multiply the result from Step One (2850) to each of these percentages.  2850 x .07 x 0.10, etc. (You multiply the numbers together because that is how combined probability works. Each condition has to be met.)

The result = 0.000002 or 0.0002%. That means there is a 0.0002% chance – a two ten-thousandths of one percent chance – of there being just one woman in my area and age range who meets my criteria for a good LTR. Or, to put it differently, the chances of there being just one such woman in my area are one in half a million. Notice, this isn’t the same as saying, “If I dated half a million women, I’d find her.” It means the chances of her even existing are one in half a million.

To put it more clearly, there are no single, available women in my age range and area who are good fits for an LTR with me. Such a mythical creature does not exist.      

Qualifications

I’m sure that some people will think I’m being overly pessimistic with my estimates.  Could be; I’m not omniscient.  But I trust my judgment. My estimates are based on my experiences with the women in my area and the experiences of other men.  For what it’s worth, I did make an attempt to adjust for bias by excluding a couple other criteria I might have included (e.g., common interests, femininity, interest in financial provisioning). Had I included them, the numbers would be even lower.

When I say there are no available, single women in my area and age range who meet my criteria, I don’t mean that these women are bad people, inferior people, that they wouldn’t make good friends or colleagues, or even that they wouldn’t be good LTR partners for other men.  I mean that they are not a good fit for an LTR with me.

Remember, I haven’t even mentioned her standards.  Although it is hard for me to believe, I might find a woman who meets my standards, and yet I might not meet her standards. I know, it sounds crazy, but it is theoretically possible. I’m kidding, of course. Women are rather infamous for their standards. Had I included the woman’s standards as well, the numbers would be even more absurd.   

Again, don’t take my numbers as an assertion of objective truth. This is by nature a very subjective assessment. I’m 62 years old. I have several unique personality characteristics, unconventional beliefs and values, and an unusual lifestyle. I’m a hard guy to match.  That is a part of why my estimates are low.  And of course, my geographic area and age range are a big part of it, too. Younger people, more conventional people, and people living in larger cities will have different standards, estimates, and results. I’m just using myself to illustrate the process. 

On the men’s side, I suspect some are thinking I could improve my odds by dating younger women, moving to a big metropolis, or becoming a passport bro.  Thanks, fellas, but I’m not interested in doing any of that.  It’s too much trouble and too little return, at least in my mind.  I’ve been living contentedly single for over a decade now, and I’m not looking to change.  This is just a statistical exercise for me.  I’m just playing with numbers.   

---

Final Thoughts

I encourage you to ask yourself, “What is the likelihood that a person who meets my standards exists in my area and age range?” You can always answer that question the simple way, using subjective judgment based on your experience. Or, you could try the method described here. It takes a little more work, but if you like playing with numbers, you might find it amusing. As I said, I found it both amusing and helpful. It reinforced what I already knew, and it gave me a laugh. It also helped me to clarify my thinking. Maybe it’ll do the same for you.