Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Why should it be "creepy" if an older guy takes a young woman?

Alek Novy occasionally speaks of the "pussy cartel", i.e. a set of loosely enforced behavioral rules for women to make sure that the price of sex remains high through artificially limiting supply. Don't let the economics jargon scare you off. It'll all become clear in a moment. One example is "slut shaming". If women were generally less discriminating about whom to have sex with, a lot of men would not even bother getting into a relationships. From this you shouldn't deduce that I think that relationships are just about having sex. However, there are plenty of guys for whom sex only happens in relationships. Some are so pussy-whipped that they become the girl's boyfriend without getting much sex at all. They are happy if she's putting out once every three months. It's great for the girl's ego, but the guy should feel like a loser.

In a world where all girls are promiscuous you would see a much smaller number of couples. Women have to look out after another, though, and if they manage to convince a large enough number among them to only have sex in committed relationships, which used to mean "marriage", while being supported by mainstream media bullshit such as the myth that sex is the most incredible thing on earth, then they surely manage to reel in enough suckers. However, to keep things in order, they may also want to ensure that men and women who pair up have roughly the same age. Otherwise, women around 30 would have to compete with women who are ten years younger, and it doesn't take much imagination to picture how that would end. So, what better way than to "creep shame" guys and telling them that they have to take a woman their own age, and that they should also consider women who are older than them? To make women who realize that their looks are waning feel less secure just spread articles like "7 Reasons Why You Should Want to Date an Older Woman":

Dating an older woman is quite the rage these days. As a woman over 35, I’ve never felt more desired by men in their late 20s and early 30s than I do now—moreso even than when I was that age. So if you’re only seeking women in the 21-29 age range, let me tell you, you’re missing out. Big time. 
Why are men so keen on dating more mature ladies? Pay no attention to the ol’ elbow-jabbing, wink-wink idea that cougars are “more likely to put out and pay for everything.” Meh, that may be a reason a na├»ve man attempts to score with an older lady, but it’s hardly the reason a smart man enters a relationship with one.

I don't think I need to add a comment to that.

Women don't like strong competition much. They are fully aware of the fact that they're aging, which is why they panic if they are still single at 30, or why they decide that they shall turn 27 five years in a row. Actually, I know guys who thought they were dating a woman that was roughly their age. In one case, it took the dude a year to find out that his girlfriend was actually seven years older than him. He said he had some doubt but didn't want to be too obtrusive. In good old mangina fashion he called me an asshole for pointing out that, if anything, this should teach him that his girlfriend is deceitful, has a seriously flawed character, and that he should have dumped her the moment he found out about her lie.

Imagine you lived in a world in which the more attractive men wanted to keep their options open and eventually settled for a much younger woman. They would go through a lot of women in their 20s. The women in their late 20s they meet may push for a relationship, but the guys just aren't interested. Eventually, they may take a much younger girlfriend or wife. However, in the big picture this means that the young woman has gotten a guy that should, according to feminists, have been paired up with a woman his own age. With one more guy her age gone, that woman may now have to settle for a cat instead. Thus, there are cries that "there are no good men left".

In an attempt to manipulate male behavior and shame them into marrying women their age, they get told that it is "creepy" if they lust after young girls. There are also plenty of young girls who like more mature guys, so you've got to tell them too that this is "creepy", too. Sorry, horny young coed, you can't fuck your tutor because it's bad for the pussy cartel!

This leads me to a comment an anonymous reader made on my last article:

There is so much pro-feminist indoctrination in the West that even men will choose more "age-appropriate" women because they've been told, over and over again until they start to believe it, that it's "creepy/weird/gross" to date younger women. Most guys think their biology is wrong.
That's the big problem with feminists: they seem to think that biology is just some kind of construct and if they just try hard enough, they'll be able to change it. I once heard some whacko, an alleged "superstar professor" in the humanities, refer to physics as "the story of matter", biology as "the story of life", and history as "the story of humanity". Of course, if everything is just a fucking "story" to you and you believe it, then you might also believe that you can just tell a different story. To some extent this works in history, but good luck with that in physics. You can't argue with nature. It's probably easier to create an artificial womb than to fix the genetic disposition of men to prefer young, attractive women over older ones who are close to being infertile.

On a related note, think of all the "man up" bullshit! No, you don't have to marry some older woman in order to fulfill your male duty, or show some kind of gender solidarity, or to do penance for all the "male privilege" you've been enjoying all your life. I certainly never heard of any "women up" appeals according to which hot coeds were encouraged to suck off the unattractive "nerds", so why should the former nerds, now with stable finances, take a 35 year-old gold digger as a partner when they can have a 25 year-old gold digger instead?

If you think I'm paranoid and only dream up some kind of feminist conspiracy, I'll direct you to Hugo Schwyzer --- the mentally ill gender studies professor who faked his way into a teaching position for which he had no credentials, who attempted to murder a former partner, and who recently had a breakdown on Twitter telling the whole world what a fraud he is. In the Atlantic, he wrote that "everybody, of all ages and gender" would benefit if men would date women their age. Here is an excerpt:
A man in his 40s who wants to date women in their 20s is making the same calculation as the man who pursues a "mail-order bride" from a country with less egalitarian values. It's about the mistaken assumption that younger women will be more malleable. Men who chase younger women aren't eroticizing firmer flesh as much as they are a pre-feminist fantasy of a partner who is endlessly starry-eyed and appreciative. The dead giveaway comes when you ask middle-aged men why they prefer to date younger; almost invariably, you'll hear complaints that their female peers are too entitled, too embittered, too feminist. 
One of the basic rules of tennis applies here: If you want to improve your skills, you need to play someone who is (at a minimum) at your own level. As sophisticated as a 20-something may be, she will be more so—with a more exquisite bullshit detector—in her 40s. When older men date much younger women, they cheat themselves out of an opportunity to be matched with a partner with the maturity to see them as they really are. Depression, the research shows, peaks for men in their mid-to-late 40s. In the face of statistics like those, middle-aged men can't afford to choose partners who lack the life experience to provide the right kind of challenge.

Does anyone care to pick out the faulty logic and hasty conclusions? I had a few, less than a handful, of experiences with women who were roughly my age or older, and I got rid of them as quickly as possible, and those encounters also taught me to just avoid them altogether. The only benefit is that they are desperate to get laid, but that's about it.

I realized that I wasn't cheating myself out of an opportunity to be matched with a partner with the maturity to see them as they really are, as Hugo Schwyzer put it. Instead, I realized that older single women all seemed to have a few screws lose, and not just because of their panic that they won't find a husband. They are not only older and less attractive. No, even worse is that they bring a staggering amount of emotional baggage with her. In addition they are neither more stable nor more mature than many women who are significantly younger. However, the icing on the cake is that they all had constructed the most absurd theories about men and dating, and about how things are supposed to go. You guessed it, move in as soon as possible, don't use protection, and please, please, please marry her. Just run, ideally into the arms of a woman who is much younger than you are, because that's what biology tells you (and her) to do anyway. It's not creepy just because feminists say so. It's nature.

What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!


  1. I can't help but feel like this sounds a bit like Roosh and the manosphere's "cock carousel" obsession, and the idea that women are "used-up" by 25. Correct me on the difference if I'm wrong.

    1. Generally speaking, a 20yo woman is more appealing than a 30 yo one (hence why 20 yo women do not need to write "why you SHOULD (how arrogant) want to date a 20 yo").

      Also, since men tend to want to commit when they are young due to perceived lack of options, and ignorance that it actually gets better, a girl who is still single by 27-28 raises red flags, whether in terms of general likeability, entitlement, or actual mental/emotional damage.

      I know a few like that, actually a good buddy of mine fucks ans sees one regularly, but he won't ever get serious with her, and everyone, family and friends, understands why. There is generally a reason why a woman who isn't too ugly is alone past a certain age. It has nothing to do with being "used up".

    2. Yes,it is and why not?Do you think the degenrates like roosh have come up with the notion of leveraging the female beauty themselves?

      This idea is around for centuries.

    3. Maybe a woman is still single at 27-28 because she wants to be? Sorry, but as much as men wish it was true, women don't need men to survive.

    4. No, women don't need men to survive, because they have the government and divorce courts backing them. Oh, who is paying the majority of taxes? Further, even "strong, empowered women" rather not spend 40 to 60 hours at work, when they could instead fake an orgasm once every couple of months and otherwise sit in the golden cage of their oppressive husband. I have met very, very few women who had a higher purpose in life, but inordinate numbers of men.

  2. Alright Aaron another great article. Here's my take on this whole situation and your first paragraph covers it. As a former military man I talked to certain individuals that worked in the intelligence field and this whole paradigm that is in place is designed to destroy the family unit and prevent the formation of families. The government and corporations want to control and raise people as individuals in a consumerist collectivist society.

    For example and I saw this in full play while I was in the military with senior female NCOs and Officers. It pretty much goes like this the 33-year-old single woman who decides she wants more from life than her career cannot so readily walk into marriage and children; by postponing them, all she has done is to push them ahead to a point in her life when she has less sexual power to attain them. Instead, she must confront the sad possibility that she might never have what was the birthright of every previous generation of women: children, a family life and a husband who however dull or oppressive he might have appeared to feminist eyes at least was there.

    1. I've been thinking about similar issues recently, but haven't fleshed them out into an article yet. The general idea is that Western society has been socially engineered to become more and more individualistic, and feminism as well as the bogus idea of widening access to higher education were instrumental in destabilizing society. We're now at a point where marrying and having a family are no longer the standard choice. Sure, marriage has also been socially engineered, but it provided some degree of security. If everyone is fighting on his own, though, you do increase the consumer base. This is also related to the Marxian idea of a "reserve army of labor":
      ...since you increase the pool of available labor if the standard model is no longer that a woman takes care of her children, husband, and the house, but has a regular job. Some people are quick to dismiss such arguments as "conspiracy theories", but just look around: in the 70s people were living better with one breadwinner than nowadays with two. Of course, economists now argue that this doesn't take "hedonics" into account, i.e. the idea that quality of life improves even if it's not visible from the numbers. As an example, we now have several hundred TV channels instead of three or four, or iPads and whatnot. It's all just hand-waving, though. People nowadays are not happier than in the 70s. In fact, depression, and mental health problems in general, are at an all-time high.

    2. How can we be consumerist and collectivist at the same time? Yeah sure if we have to buy everything for ourselves as a single person, we are consumerist, but if we were a family we would do that in any case, perhaps be even more consumerist. As a single person, and moreover as an impoverished single person (as a lot of us are these days) if we ain't got the cash, we can't consume.
      And as for collectivism, the family is perhaps the most obvious model for a collective unit, and the most traditional one.
      Yep, a social experiment is going on but this is no different from other social experiments throughout the ages. And there is too much nostalgia for the so called "good old days". People forget that spouses didn't get on, or died early and people would remarry and this would create its own set of problems.
      I am nearly 40 and have dated a guy who was 20 years younger (!) and a guy who, conversely, was 15 years older. Basically I work by the rule that if I fancy them I'll go for it, though in fact I actually fancy very few people. The older one was better in bed LOL :)

  3. Stuff like that really reminds me what a scam the entire feminist movement is.

    You should really google some of hugo schwyzer's twitter feeds, it really shows what a nutcase the guy is.

    Question for Aaron: what do you mean by the bogus idea of widening access to higher education?

    1. The problem with widening access to higher education is that most degrees are pretty much useless. Nowadays you may have a college degree in business or in communications, and it may well be required by employers if you want to work in an office, but the original (dishonest) promise was that higher education would advance people. Instead, it only placed the additional burden on them that they now all have to have a degree while you could have had the same job decades ago basically straight after high school. Or did anyone really believe that everyone will become CEO? Colleges are full of people who shouldn't even be there, but what's the solution to that problem? Of course it's to lower standards so that everybody can matriculate and eventually get a degree in communications or history at some third-rate college. I know, I know, this problem is much more pronounced in non-technical degrees like, say, communications, history, or business, but the scale of the problem is absolutely staggering. It's even worse in countries like the US where higher education is not free, and young people graduate with six figures of debt and hardly a chance to ever repay their student loans.

    2. I do agree that some degrees are literally bullshit degrees (communication etc....) and also that some eployers push the education enveloppe too far. I've noticed this as well, some jobs don't require a degree at all, yet they demand it from a future employee. Take a look at all those people working in an interim office. So what is it that you do all day? Oh you look up cv's from people in a database and then you forward them to your clients. Yeah you really need a degree for that shit.

      But I'm still having doubts f.e. I live in Belgium and according to the world economic forum we're having the second best public education after Finland. When I was studying the level only went up, more maths were added, courses that were normally given over a one year span were now given over a 3 month period.

      I recently decided to pursue accounting in evening school and it really amazed me how much has changed. I really felt that the level had increased dramatically.

      I've seen many people drop out of college the first year.

      But there's something to be said about you're argument.

  4. It's better to promote vocational training or schools that specialize in a certain subjects, careers or jobs, things that direct people into more specific targets than bogus promises. Many students graduate without knowing well what they will do in future.

  5. The main reason why I like "older" women (I am okay with hot ones in their late 20s and early 30s) is exactly the reason you mentioned - that they are usually easier to get into bed.

    However, in my experience, without any exception, women who were single past late 20s almost always had serious personality issues which made them totally unattractive to guys for anything long term.

  6. Aaron

    I'm 30 and like most average guys I didn't really have a lot of luck when it came to women between 18-26. However, the average woman in my peer group has plenty of men chasing her till she get's to 30. There are many women who knew at the time that I wanted a relationship with them, however I was always passed over "for better men" I'm sure every guy has a story to tell.

    Eventually things improve for men with age as a result of genuine achievement such as getting status,handling real responsibility, and genuine competence. Also the "sex haze" tend to calm down a little after 28 and you can evaluate things more clearly.

    Now, the problem appears to be as Alek Novy has pointed out in his articles, men are apparently not allowed to be selfish. So, now that I have better options, I get called an "asshole" for politely declining a "wanting to catch up over coffee" with some of the women who are now 30 and looking for a "serious relationships" only. I get called an "asshole" for dating women who are 25. You see the issue goes far deeper than dating, it is more to do with "male sacrifice/disposability"

    When women have power, they should use it for themselves. When men have power they should use it for the benefit of everyone. Men are not allowed to be selfish.

    I'm constantly struck by the ARROGANCE of some women, even some of female my friends who at 30 go up men they've been rejecting for the last 5 years and say "I'm looking for something serious" , "We should get together some time" "How come we didn't date? were have a lot in common"

    In the dating world, apparently every woman over 30 thinks an Engineer is "amazing, smart, even sexy" when at 25 if the words "Engineer" came out of your mouth you would be treated as if you had leprosy.

    Men get pissed off because an average woman has had PLENTY of chances at meeting men by the time she is 30- PLENTY unless she lived as a nun, however when men get to 29 you become "a player" if you DARE to be selective or have a criteria.

    1. About being an Engineer, this is truth. I've experienced both cases multiple times.
      Although it seems now, maybe because being nerdy is trendy or because most younger guys have useless degrees and can't get decent jobs, even girls around 25 think being an engineer is impressive.

  7. I'm curious, doesn't the socially accepted norm of marrying someone roughly the same age predate the rise of feminism by a good many decades (at least in Western society)? Makes you wonder how that tradition came about in the first place, considering it doesn't make sense from a biological standpoint as you point out...

    1. Which time period are you referring to right now, and which culture? The 1920s or '30s in the US can't be compared to the situation in Europe. There were large-scale social engineering efforts in the US back then, such as the promotion of home ownership (to burden workers with debt and therefore lower the chance of strikes), the design of suburbs to maximize petrol consumption, and also the suffragette movement, a precursor of 1960s feminism. I wouldn't be surprised had there been articles that admonished men not to marry younger women. Just think of the influence the church had and still has in the United States. The diamond craze, due to marketing by DeBeers started as well during that time.

      In Europe the situation was quite different due to the aftermath of the first World War and economic problems. Hitler writes in Mein Kampf that the common laborer normally found himself unable to provide for a family and had a hard time marrying, while women were trying to get a well-off husband, of which there weren't many around, thus leading to widespread frustration.

    2. I didn't necessarily have a particular time period in mind. It's just that looking at my grandparents, for instance, I get the impression that the average age difference between husband and wife in the Western world has always been rather low.

      Doing a quick Google search seems to confirm my suspicion, seeing that in 1890 the average difference between men and women getting married in the US was just 4 years.


      Thinking about it some more, probably the main reason explaining this phenomenon - i.e. men getting married at a far too young age given their biological predispositions - must have been the Church and their incessant preaching that sex before marriage was a sin.

      I don't know many guys who would want to wait until their mid-30s in order to satisfy their natural urges. This ties in with the point you made above that if more men were getting sex outside of established relationships, many wouldn't even bother with marriage at all...

    3. I'm sure the Church played a major role shaping societal norms. Also, there was much greater pressure back then to marry your daughters, and the family unit was much stronger. Nowadays, feminism has "liberated" women so that they normally have to work, but in the 19th century there weren't many career paths for unmarried women. Families wanted their daughters to marry, and I'm sure many a young man found himself at least to some degree forced to marry even if he didn't feel ready. Further, its worth pointing out that "love" is an idea that came about in Victorian England. Marrying someone for "love" was unusual. Utilitarian considerations, on the other hand, were much more common. Besides, especially among the better off, it was common to have mistresses, and the lower classes could at least resort to prostitution.

    4. Next article: Why should it be "creepy" if an older guy takes multiple young women? I mean polygamy should be legal. It is just part of free will.

    5. Polygamy is legal in some corners of this planet. In general, though, I don't buy your argument. If you wanted to base law on anybody's expression of free will, then anything would have to be legal, including murder and the like.

    6. "I'm curious, doesn't the socially accepted norm of marrying someone roughly the same age predate the rise of feminism by a good many decades"

      That's simply because the average age of marriage was so low for both men and women. Men couldn't marry much younger than themselves if they were marrying at 18. Also, marriages were more stable, so there were not divorced men re-marrying.

      This is why feminism arose - when secularism and Industrialisation opened up the free sexual market by postponing the age of marriage. The first feminists cared only for criminalizing prostitution and raising the age of consent, and only began to campaign for the vote as a means to more effectively rig the free sexual market.
      Feminism continues to this day as a kind of sexual trade union for women.

  8. Awesome article :) my great-grandfather had a wife 12 years younger than him (his second wife) and no one gave a single fuck about that. Nowadays it would be like "OMG what an asshole/creep !".

    I have something to add about that "pussy cartel" though, it is also reinforced by jealous/insecure men who blame girls for sleeping around because they don't get any. I don't know if they consciously do that so that the other men have less chances as well, and I'm pretty sure they don't even think about that because they're dumb, but there might be some truth to it. What's your stance on that Aaron ?

    1. Regarding your second point, have a look at this:

  9. The reason much older men should not talk to younger woman or young girls is something you just don't do. Creepy men who hit on young girls with bad intentions in mind ought to know better than to speak to a much younger girl. There is enough misconceptions about woman in today's society.

    1. That's a lovely comment. Would you mind telling me more about things men should and shouldn't do?

    2. What about creepy young men then? Is creepiness OK as long as it's not from al older man?

  10. Nice article. Fount it at the antifeminist.

    Come over to Human-Stupidity and comment.

    I wish Hollywood did a re-make of Romeo and Juliet. Actually, several ones

    One would be Romeo arrested, convicted, registered a sex offender.

    Another one would be about that beautiful couple, the british teacher and his infatuated student who fled to France. When he got 5(?) years in prison, she cried "I will wait for you".

    Hollywood is too busy promoting other political agendas .....

    1. Thanks for the comment. I just had a brief look at your site, and subscribed to your newsletter. I don't know whether I'll have the time to engage in discussions in the comment section, but I'll surely find time to read some of your articles every now and again.

  11. People are single for a reason. A 40-year-old bachelor is probably a player (or a loser) and a 35-year-old bachelorette is probably picky and not relationship-oriented (or ugly). It is not just that single women become bitter. The bitter, ugly, picky women stay single.

    A 25-year-old man can date women from 21-25. But a 25-year-old woman will date men from 25-35. It is really tough for a guy in his twenties to overcome this imbalance. The 2:1 imbalance is even worse when you realize most people are paired up. For example, suppose you have 100 men and 50 women in a suitable demographic. And suppose half the women are matched up. Then you have 75 single men chasing 25 single women. Yikes!

    Then things reverse in the thirties and forties. The worst case is when a woman's beauty declines faster than her comprehension. This is common among the really hot ones. When she was 30, all the 40-year-old men (and most 30-year-old's) were rushing to buy her drinks. Now she wonders where they are when she is 40. Well, the 40-year-old's are still chasing 30-year-old women. The desirable men either are married, or divorced and chasing younger women. Available guys are short, bald, broke, divorced, in their 50's. These formerly-hot women now want to "compromise" with a good-looking guy of similar age and financial status. Sorry honey, that ship sailed long ago. Hurry to find an older sugar daddy, or an ugly financially stable age-peer. Or buy some cats.

    Widowed or divorced women can be okay. I have dated middle-aged divorcees who married young. They had a fraction of the sexual partners of your average college girl. I forgive women with educational or career accomplishments, like a Ph.D. or M.D. But women (and men) who have done nothing but screw around for decades deserve contempt.

    1. Isn't screwing around for decades what many men want thought? And then when they feel ready to have a family at 45, well, just get a younger woman! Women don't have that luxury.

      Somehow this makes me kind of depressed, even though I'm nowhere near 30 (and luckily don't want kids so won't become one of those desperate ones). As a young woman, if men would ditch me for a younger version of myself as I get old, why get in a relationship? Why waste my youthfulness on someone who finds me desirable and wants me because of it, and then after life together would prefer those 20-year-olds (sexually)? ..It's sad I'm even bothered about this, since I'm in a relationship and he's actually 8 years older than me. But maybe that's part of the reason. You can say it's biology, but it doesn't change the fact that men's sexuality seems depressing.

    2. The vast majority of men don't have that luxury either.

      Please read this blog post:
      It covers the issues you just brought up.

    3. I read it. And I get the point; of course, in a good relationshipt, it's not like (s)he is waiting to find someone younger/richer/"better", and sex isn't everything, the memories you make together strenghten the relationship.

      But, my point was (not sure if you care, but since I started and am curious) that you're still saying that the ideal situation (for the man) is to get a woman significantly younger. Because men are less mature? Doubt that. But rather so they can have more time to live their youth ...and so that they wouldn't lose attraction: "However, if you take a girl in her early to mid twenties as your wife when you are in your early thirties, which I consider a reasonable age of marriage for a guy, then you'll grow older with her. She will become the mother of your children, and when she's entering her thirties, you'll be around 40. I don't see why, as long as both stay in shape, physical attraction should suddenly evaporate."

      So that sounds nice for the man.. What about the woman? Why would she want an older man, attractionwise it's not like most men age any better than women, so is it about financial stability? Depressing. Maybe it's different there, but where I live (Scandinavia) educated women aren't in a rush to get married in their early to mid 20's. When they do so, why would they rather have an older man than someone their own age? Men's fertility also declines even if more gradually. And then health problems when they get older..

      Well, the point wasn't to wonder about why women would want an older man, I think you got it. Maybe it just is how it is, no can do if it bothers me. Maybe it's not good to dwell on these things on the internet, truth at least here is that people are more often than not together with someone close to their age, and as said, if they're happy, they aren't going to change for someone younger/whatever just because of that.

    4. Many women indeed want the guy to be older, so I just take this as a biological fact. Also, I don't want to say that all men age well, but it's certainly within your reach. All it takes is a modicum of exercise, and skipping cigarettes and alcohol. I'm oversimplifying, but lifestyle choices play a big role. Of course, our biological clock doesn't tick quite so fast compared to women.

      By the way, I did marry a Scandinavian woman. She is significantly younger than me, certainly educated, and her prime interest is not financial stability. While I like to "bitch" about feminism, I do think that it does make life easier for some guys since the women do not have to rely on the man that much, and don't expect to, either. For instance, my perception is that in Germany marriages are much more strongly driven by the woman's desire for financial security. On the other hand, in Scandinavian countries you've got a very well-functioning welfare state, free healthcare etc., and women are expected to work as well. You could almost come to the conclusion that the "feminists" Scandinavian countries give love marriages a much greater chance than, say, clearly capitalist societies like the US, UK, or Germany.

      Speaking of age differences in general, I think it's quite well established that men age more slowly. I'm only hypothesizing, but I think you could make a good argument that some women prefer an older man because they know that they will be more attractive than the women her husband meets that are of his age. This is all just conjecture, but on a subconscious level it might play a role. Of course I'm presuming that the guy stops his partying lifestyle after settling down, and that his social contacts are then mostly constrained to his work and hobbies, which means that he probably won't even meet so many younger women anymore.

    5. I do honestly have to laugh at the comments which suggest all women are out to get a man at any cost, and that we are all desperate and dried up and lonely by the age of 40 and should get some cats...and moreover that there "must be a reason" why we're still single at that age...or if we're divorced then we're damaged goods nd probably have "mental health" issues.
      For the record I was married at 24 and divorced at 31 because my ex husband turned out to be a nutjob and I do mean psycho (cruelty to animals, the whole works), so even though I have managed to put it behind me I am not sure I want to get married again after that.
      There is this mistaken and popular assumption that everything must be perfect and it objectifies people according to age, income, etc. The fact is, shit happens in life. Most people are dreaming of this ideal but even if they achieve it they rarely seem to be happy for very long. I know several guys who were desperate to get married and have kids and eventually did so, in their 40s. Now, they hate their wife, they hate the domestic scene and they hate all the debt that is piling up around them.
      There are more sides to the whole "story of life" and obviously the older vs. younger argument and all its associated issues is one, but it's more about the chase LOL...not what actually happens afterwards and when "boring reality" sets in.
      But to recap from earlier, no, it is a mistaken assumption that all middle-aged women are desperate for a man. Myself, I like my own space and prefer working on my creative projects alone anyway. I don't gravitate towards groups of people or gossip.And actually I'm willing to bet there are a lot of people buried in the woodwork who feel the same way.

  12. AnonymousSeptember 2, 2013 at 3:14 AM

    "Next article: Why should it be "creepy" if an older guy takes multiple young women? I mean polygamy should be legal. It is just part of free will."

    How about because widespread polygamy makes a modern technological society impossible? If 20% of the men take 80% of the women, that means nearly 80% of the men will find sex, marriage, and family unachieveable, and will have NO stake in the society. If 80% of men in a country are incentivized towards indolence (since no realistic level of positive economic achievement will attract a peer wife), crime, even violent insurrection, what kind of place will that be in which to live? (Hint: look at Haiti, the Congo, and such.) Forget prosperity, air conditioning, the Internet, antibiotics, clean water, and other luxuries.

  13. As a woman in her early 20s I can honestly say that it is definitely mich more creepy and grosz when an older guys tries to hit on me. Younger guys are generally fitter and I can relate to them more. When I see older guys trying to go after younger women my first thought is "player." Also I disagree that men age slower... I know several women who are several years OLDER than their partner and before I found out their age, I thought all of the women were actually younger than their partners. I guess its all a matter of experience and personal opinion, but I think when women say they like "older men" they usually mean just a few years older, not 15+ years older.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.