Sunday, July 24, 2016

A female commenter disagrees that men age slower than women

This is a brief post for a nice chuckle. Moments ago, an allegedly female anonymous commenter left the following on my 2013 post Why should it be "creepy" if an older guy takes a young woman? 

As a woman in her early 20s I can honestly say that it is definitely much more creepy and gross 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.

Let's make this brief:

- Are you seriously implying that it is in general creepy and gross when a guy hits on you, and it's "much more" creepy and gross when an older man does it?

- You are most likely lying about your age. You claim that you are in your early 20s. In this context, "younger guy" means younger than you and that just isn't happening because women in their early 20s don't give the time of day to an 18 year old guy.

- Disagree all you want about the fact that men age slower. That won't make it untrue. Also, women your age normally socialize with women their age, so it does raise an eyebrow that you claim to know women several years older than their partner. Considering that they are probably not your peers who fuck 15 or 16 year olds, you most certainly fantasize about 35 y/o women who have top-shelf men who are in their late 20s.

- Men who date older women are almost invariably cucks because any man with any worth on the dating market will go for a younger woman, ceteris paribus, just like any woman with any worth on the dating market will got for a male with more money, ceteris paribus. Take a healthy 30 year old marrying a 35 year old. Move the clock forward 5 years: he's now 35, she is 40. Do you, by any chance, notice something?

- You telling me something about "experience and personal opinion"? If you really are in your early 20s, go ahead and enjoy getting pumped and dumped for a few years. If you are, what I consider much more plausible, around 30, stop deluding yourself about your life and try to make the most about the few chances you'll get. The clock is ticking.

- "Older men" most certainly refers to men older than the typical age gap between men of women of something like 3 to 5 years.

 What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!
(Also, if you’ve got a comment that is off-topic or only tangentially related to this article, then please post in the most recent Open Thread. Thank you.)


  1. Hmm, the women I know who are older than their partners (including a 20 something dating a 18 something) are pretty damaged. Not something I would pick for a long term relationship.

    Of course, I know a lot of damaged women I would not pick for a ltr. And some of these even date older (10+ years) guys.

    Wonder if dating outside of the age range (And by this I mean, same age or + 4 years max (older guy seems the 'natural' thing)) is some sort of indicator of possible issues.

    I'm wondering if I'm the only one who is not worried about the words 'creepy' and 'gross' that much. Seems this shaming trick has lost a lot of it's power on me.

    1. I'm wondering if I'm the only one who is not worried about the words 'creepy' and 'gross' that much. Seems this shaming trick has lost a lot of it's power on me.

      One thing I've learned is that no decent humans use those words to describe others' flirting attempts. I've never in my entire life EVER met a 9 (tens don't exist in real life, so let's go with nines)... I've never met a nine who creep shames guys or calls their actions gross. Not a single one.

      In fact, when an akward guy approaches her, tries to clumsily flirt with her, she'll say something like "oh how cute of him". I'm not saying she'll fuck him. But she won't humiliate him. She'll think it's cute that he's low-status or akward or what have you. She won't call him gross or a creep.

      It's those frustrated sevens-acting-nine that do all the creep-shaming, and omg it was so gross how this dude dared ask me out, etc... It's an overcompensation.

      So one reason not to care is that no sane, good, decent humans attach those labels that easily. Of course genuine grossness/creepiness exists. But those are actions that all men would agree being labelled as such as well. We're talking about using the terms haphazardly to bragplain... which is again something done by frustrated seven-wannabe-nines.

    2. (Anon op here)

      Aha yeah, the bragplain. That would explain a lot. While working last week (at a bar) I noticed a crazy ex jokingly complain against some dudes they grabbed her ass or something. (The girl is crazy). Weirdest shit ever, as they were at least 3 arms lengths away from her at all times.

      (She did always complain a lot about creepy dudes hitting on her, and being assaulted and raped etc. Poor broken girl. And poor dudes who interact with her without realizing how fucked up she is).

      Noticed before that the 9's that I know are actually (same as the pua theory says) not approached that much. They actually like it a lot when random dudes just start chatting with them a bit.

    3. i know a girl who keeps looking at me ,and then tells me i am creepy, she doesnt give me the time of day, and she still keeps looking.
      she is hot.
      she says hello(face face) to me,and then bans me on whatsup on first message(once finds out who i am).
      the more i get exposed to her to more i think she has issues.
      as she is always behave contradictory to point of "WTF"?
      bitch please stop looking at me and give me those deceptive signals. she is odd as fuck.guys dig her look wise, who are hotter then me,atleast taller.i am puzzled.

  2. There is some truth that women are "extra creeped out by older guys"... but that's only because they need an externality to tag the rejection on.

    If an older charismatic (not pushy), popular and high-status authority guy in her field approaches her, she will be absolutely delighted and cream her pants.

    If a lower status male (who also happens to be older) approaches her, she will reject him with disgust for being low status, but blame it on his age.

    Speaking of which, this is a common thing about women, and their desire to have "approved reasons for rejecting a man"

    A low status guy her age approaches her. She will instinctually dismiss him with disgust, and blame it on his slight potbelly. (Because fatshaming men is acceptable).

    Then a high status guy with a much bigger belly approaches her, and she is delighted. (wait didn't you say it was 'disgusting' for men with nonflat stomachs to talk to girls like you!?!?)

    Put in other terms... There is some truth to what she's saying, but from a different angle. If you're unattractive AND older, she will be extra creeped out (vs the creep out she feels when a younger unattractive man approaches her).

    This is why she talked about "even more creeped out".

    The important thing to point out is this:

    - Women who creep shame are screwed up people, not good people in any way shape or form

    - So when we're saying "she creep-shames an unattractive guy her age a little vs creep-shames extra an older guy"... this isn't women in general doing this, it's screwed nasty immature idiots, not all women

  3. The commenter is ridiculous. Alek hits it on the head pointing out that higher status, charismatic guy approached her, the odds are it would not be creepy to her at all. There is also the "Cougar" phenomena, which suggests that both genders can be ok going after younger people of the opposite sex.

  4. creepy high smv guyJuly 24, 2016 at 7:20 PM

    Part of it is projection, in which the women who is a 7 (or worse) and getting approached by a low-value guy...for her, it's a reflection of her own not-so-great-SMV. So to feel better, it's not "oh, all i can attract is average dude with meh status and meh looks"...but more like, "MEN ARE ALL CREEPS, oh my gawd, these creepy guys hit on me, it's like, so creepy".

    1. Pretty good summary of the dynamic.

      A good exercise is to go look at those "anti-harassment" organizations. If you look at their blogs you will see them writing 5 billion pages of treatises against being complimented, or flirted with, and how awfull male attention is.

      And then you go research who's behind those organizations, it is actual twos and ones. Like women so ugly that you didn't even know they existed (true twos and ones are rarer than nines and tens, but all present in feminism and organized-creep-shaming groups).

      Refer to this article:
      Proof that most sexual harassment is not

  5. according to this author, the biological clocks applies to both men and women:

    1. Oh boy! Don't read gender studies nonsense when you want to learn about biology.

    2. "But according to Yale graduate student Moira Weigel, we only began using the phrase "biological clock" to describe fertility in the late 1970s — around the time that Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen published a column called "The Clock Is Ticking for the Career Woman.""

      No shit... so ... before women worked in the workplace and mostly were staying at home looking after the kids there was no word for how you should hurry up and get kids?

      "And while female fertility declines with age, so does male fertility"

      Look an unsourced statement without statistics ... could it be because ... male fertility declines a lot slower? Nahh... that would almost be lying by omission right? making it look like the two are similar.

      And just have to say a person writing a random book does not make it have any value. Books are not peer reviewed, they are easy enough to be full of shit. I know this from experience, I read 'Female Chauvinist Pigs' a book that tries hard to look scientific by having references to literature but fails hard at being scientific. (Literary references to your own interviews don't count, darling. As does failing to report on the history of feminism correctly).

    3. Books are not peer reviewed

      Also, peer review itself doesn't mean much. It just means "get reviewed by your peers".

      If you write a feminist paper, "peer review" means "have it reviewed by other feminists".

    4. Exactly, Alek. Perhaps a bit off topic but such biased feminist peer-reviewing is already massively influencing politics.

      A worrying example is the recent tightening of the german
      anti-rape law under the title "No means No" where first steps are undertaken to turn the principle of "Innocence until proven guilty" upside down making it way easier to "successfully" falsely accuse (mostly) man of rape.

      German jurists where pointing out over and over again that the current legal situation regarding rape were already strict and completely sufficient. However, a clique of feminists "experts" where influencing the responsible parliamentel committees by presenting "objective" expert reports praised for there validity by biased organisations. Some of these experts where actually also members of these organisations - absurd. Thats what you call a "citation cartel".

      Here the related passage of an article by one of the highest judges of the german federal court writing about this bogus (sorry, its in german):

      "Diesmal waren sieben Sachverständige geladen, darunter kein Zwerg und nur ein einziger Schwabe. Ihre schriftlichen Gutachten können auf der Website des Ausschusses nachgelesen werden. Nur so viel sei angemerkt: Es wurden ausschließlich solche Sachverständige gehört, die schon lange im Vorfeld dezidiert die Meinung vertreten hatten, es bestünden "gravierende Schutzlücken" und "erheblicher Reformbedarf". Man darf sie als "eingespieltes Team" bezeichnen. Sie treffen sich bei fast jeder Anhörung wieder und kennen ihre Gutachten vermutlich gegenseitig auswendig. Ihre Positionen leiten sie wechselseitig voneinander ab, indem etwa eine sachverständige Hochschullehrerin ein Gutachten im Auftrag des Vereins einer anderen Sachverständigen schreibt, die als dessen Sprecherin sodann dieses Gutachten lobt und preist, was wiederum die erste Sachverständige als Beleg für die Überzeugungskraft ihres neuen Gutachtens wertet – und so weiter. Das übliche Spiel also, wenn es mächtigen Lobbygruppen darum geht, "Breitseiten"-Schlachten zu schlagen, in denen keine Gefangenen mehr gemacht werden."




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