Finding a relationship as a single mother — what to take into account?

At Marriage Hunter, a significant proportion of our clients are women in their 30s who are raising one or more children from previous relationships. In other words — single mothers. Many of them have been out of a stable relationship for some time and have accumulated experiences that shape their current approach to dating. One common pattern we see is the gradual shift from hopeful romantic expectations to a more cautious and often critical stance toward men.

Frequently, these women report having entered relationships with high hopes, only to encounter men who withdrew emotionally or avoided commitment shortly after intimacy began. This recurring pattern can lead to feelings of disappointment and disillusionment. Research supports this common trajectory: studies have shown that men are statistically less likely to pursue long-term relationships with women who already have children, especially when they perceive parental responsibilities as limiting their own freedom or resources (Anderson, Kaplan, & Lancaster, 1999; Brase, 2006).

As a result, many single mothers begin to face what might be called a “romantic bifurcation”: they can either gamble on a charismatic, high-value man—who may have the traits they desire but is unlikely to fully commit—or they may feel pressure to "settle" for a stable and loyal provider who lacks the full suite of traits they originally considered ideal.

This dilemma isn’t just emotional—it’s strategic. The decision involves balancing emotional attraction, perceived security, and the long-term well-being of their children. Research from evolutionary psychology explains this tension through the lens of dual mating strategies: women are often attracted to genetically "high-value" partners (e.g. tall, confident, socially dominant men), but may prefer more nurturing and stable partners for long-term parenting (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000).

Understanding this trade-off is key. A successful post-single motherhood relationship often begins not with compromise, but with clarity—clarity about one's values, long-term goals, and realistic relationship dynamics in light of current responsibilities. At Marriage Hunter, our mission is to help women navigate this complex space not from a place of bitterness or resignation, but with dignity, intelligence, and long-term strategy.

The Beauty and the Beast Paradox

Among single mothers—particularly those who have separated from the father of their child—one recurring theme surfaces with striking regularity: the enduring allure of the Beauty and the Beast narrative. Even after divorce or emotional hardship, many women continue to express a desire for what they perceive as transformation-based love. That is, the wish to be the “beauty” who turns a "beast"—a difficult, dominant, or emotionally unavailable man—into a devoted prince.

But the truth, often overlooked even by those pursuing it, is more complex: what many women truly desire is not either the prince or the beast—but both. This internal duality reflects what evolutionary psychologists have long referred to as the dual mating strategy (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Pillsworth & Haselton, 2006). On one side, women are biologically drawn to traits associated with genetic fitness—dominance, assertiveness, high status, physical attractiveness. On the other, they seek traits conducive to long-term pair bonding—empathy, commitment, caregiving capacity, and stability.

The paradox becomes particularly acute for single mothers who now carry added responsibilities and constraints. The stakes are no longer confined to romantic chemistry; now, potential partners are evaluated on their ability to integrate into a family unit, provide emotional stability, and become a father figure. Yet the emotional brain often still craves the tension and intensity associated with the "beast"—the untamed, passionate, unpredictable masculine presence.

This is why so many women are repeatedly drawn to charismatic but noncommittal men: they represent the “beast” side of the paradox. Yet they often lack the capacity—or willingness—to transform into the "prince." Conversely, settling for a man who only exhibits caregiving or provider traits (i.e., the prince archetype) may leave a woman feeling emotionally unsatisfied or even resentful over time.

Understanding this paradox is essential. Without recognizing the internal conflict between attraction and security, many women will either:

• Chase the "beast" again, hoping this one will change—often resulting in repeated patterns of abandonment or disappointment.

• Or choose the "prince," only to find themselves emotionally disconnected due to a lack of passion or desire.
  
  

For a single mother strategizing her next serious relationship, acknowledging the Beauty and the Beast dynamic isn’t just a fairy-tale reference—it’s a psychological reality that must be faced consciously. The ideal partner is not a fantasy hybrid of emotional protector and raw masculine force; rather, it is a man who has matured enough to integrate both aspects of his personality and who is willing to use that integration in service of something larger than himself—family, fidelity, legacy.

At Marriage Hunter, we help women distinguish between immature “beasts,” fragile “princes,” and those rare men who have become self-aware enough to live out both roles meaningfully.

The Beta Caregiver Boredom Problem

After a painful relationship with a dominant, high-agency “alpha” male has ended—whether due to lack of commitment, volatility, or emotional unavailability—many single mothers experience a psychological shift. They begin to consciously seek safety, predictability, and emotional support. As a result, there is often a strong tendency to pursue what they perceive as the opposite of their previous partner: a kind, emotionally available, stable “beta” male. In theory, this shift feels rational and even healing. In practice, however, it often creates new and less predictable problems.

Women rarely articulate this transition as a move from alpha to beta preference, but in reality, it is often exactly that. The "beta" partner is chosen for his ability to provide, commit, and remain conflict-averse. These men are frequently non-threatening, gentle, agreeable, and sensitive—traits that, especially after relational trauma or exhaustion, may appear deeply appealing. They may even be viewed as more mature or emotionally evolved than the previous partner.

But the hard psychological truth is that for many women, especially those whose personality profiles are high in novelty-seeking or relational intensity (as measured by Big Five Openness or higher baseline dopamine response to unpredictability), this arrangement becomes stifling over time. The loss of polarity—the tension between dominance and receptivity, risk and stability—can lead to an unexpected kind of emotional flatlining.

Research in relationship psychology confirms that women often experience diminished sexual and emotional desire when predictability and caretaking overwhelm relational tension (Murray, Holmes & Griffin, 1996; Baumeister et al., 2001). In short: safety without polarity leads to boredom.

This boredom is rarely immediate. In the early stages, women often enjoy the change of pace, the attentiveness, and the absence of volatility. They are being cherished, listened to, and even “served.” But gradually, the lack of tension erodes excitement. A dynamic emerges in which the woman subtly assumes the dominant role—not because she intended to, but because the partner abdicated it. This role reversal often leads to diminishing respect, declining attraction, and eventually a deep, unspoken frustration.

A classic example involves how beta...