Do Women Prefer Older Men? Debunking The Myth


hugh Hefner (86) married Crystal Harris (26).

The finding that women are attracted to men older than themselves whereas men are attracted to relatively younger women has been explained by social psychologists in terms of economic exchange rooted in traditional sex-role norms. An alternative evolutionary model suggests that males and females follow different reproductive strategies, and predicts a more complex relationship between gender and age preferences. In particular, males’ preferences for relatively younger females should be minimal during early mating years, but should become more pronounced as the male gets older.

Young females are expected to prefer somewhat older males during their early years and to change less as they age. I will focus on female preference, since there is a general consensus about male tastes. I feel compelled to redress much of the misinformation being circulated on the manosphere about what is the male age prefered on female choices. When it comes to mating, there’s an unscientific, but prevailing opinion that older men want younger women and viceversa.

For example, the evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa wondered on psychology today why teenage girls don’t swoon for middle-aged billionaires:

On the other hand, couples where the woman is significantly older than her male partner currently have a high prominence in international media and in popular culture I will start analyzing actual data of married couples by differences in ages between husband and wife. According to 2012 Census Bureau data, 7.2% of the couples are composed of a husband 10 years older (or more) than his wife, and only 2.3% of husbands are 15 (or more) years older than their wives of the total married population.


These data arcrushing. This initial analysis of census data suggests that the extent of the older man vs. younger woman couple is exaggerated by the manosphere. This data represents a break from this wrong view, meaning that most desirable women under 25 (on their peak of beauty) do not marry middle aged men (over 40), because despite the financial support is currently no longer a necessity for women.

The exchange concept assumes that men tried to exchange their socioeconomic resources (such as education or income) against the physical beauty of women and viceversa, in pre-industrialized societies. Nonetheless, clear empirical evidence for this pattern has been waning mainly after sexual revolution at mid-twentieth century.

Now I’ll briefly present a meta-analysis of studies testing female mate preferences. Let’s see:

1) Bram P. Buunk et al (2001) found that women prefer partners of their own age, regardless of their own age and regardless of the level of relationship involvement.

2) Pawlowski & Dunbar (1999) found that women typically prefer males 2-3 years older than themselves and this remains stable across the age range.

3) Preferences of teenage females (from 12 to 19) are similar in pattern to those of adult females, ranging, on average, from their own age to several years older (Kenrick et al, 1996).;jsessionid=97BBB57AE185C2526ABD9BAA032BA2B5.d02t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false

4) Thao Ha et al 2009 tested that male social status does not strongly affect mating desire on female teens and at their first twenty.

5) Women younger than 30 years made more contacts with older men. (But note that the average-age difference is just around 2 years). At higher ages, women contacted older males less and less in absolute terms. Contacting younger men was very rare for women in their 20s or younger. With increasing age, hypophily also rose for women.

6) The older a person is the older the faces they prefer and this effect is more pronounced in female judges [Buss 1999]. The rating of physical attractiveness perceived is own-age linked. Thus young persons tend to prefer youthful facial traits.

7) By the other hand, Zebrowitz et al, 1993 showed that attractiveness ratings of male faces went down at about the same pace as they did for females. Suggesting that a youthful appearance might contribute to attractiveness in both sexes.

8) In a study based ratings of physical attractiveness reflect a negative correlation between age and beauty. Ratings of striking attractiveness or handsomeness were quite heavily concentrated among subjects under 35, and the rest of ratings distribution tends to show steady deterioration with growing age (Campbell et al 1976).

9) Milord found that age was an important determinant of preference judgements for facial attractiveness of two age groups, with younger faces being preferred. (Milord , J. T.,1978).

10) Korthase found that a strong negative correlation (r= – 0.91) between perceived age and physical attractiveness in the ratings of facial photographs of young, middle-aged, and older adults.

11) Christian Rudder, president of OkCupid, is the guy who digs up the numbers from the millions of people using his free dating site. In his book, “Dataclysm,”, data reveals the same results. Young women from 18-30 find guys of her age or slightly older as the most attractive for them, and so forth. Up until about 30, when women will almost always prefer a man of her age or younger. :

12) A 2008 study, cited by Time, published in the journal Psychology of Women Quarterly found that women who are 10 or more years older than their partner report more relationship satisfaction than women who are with men their own age or younger:

13) Glancing at 2 online dating sites (and online dating studies always relying on the greater validity:

a) OkCupid Blog found that man’s desirability peaks at 26-27 and about 70% of female dating pool is interested in male daters at that range of age: Imagen And the distribution average for the subset of female population of 18 years old:Their desired male age is ranging from 18 to 24 approximately. Imagen

And the distribution average for the subset of female population of 30 years old: Their desired male age is ranging from 23 to 33, approximately.


b) Here’s the probability a woman responds to a message from a man on


We can see that women are likely to respond to a message from someone younger than they are from someone older. AYI  concludes that, among 35,942 users ages 30 to 49, a woman was five times more likely to show interest in a man who was five years her junior, rather than one who was five years older.

14) Women are typically indifferent between men at their age and men who are 5 to 9 years older (only for women ages 30 to 39 is the effect slightly negative and statistically significant) but prefer men of a similar age to men who are older by 10 or more years.

According to Donald Symons the peak physical attractiveness for men is at the age about 25-30. The natural force (no entrainment) gradually increases until that age. Most of male models and strippers usually work in their twenties. According to the traditional division of life in the Middle Ages, for example in the papers of Isidore of Seville, is at 28 years old when a man reaches greater strength, intelligence, virtue and physical beauty. In 1500 Albrecht Dürer painted his most famous self-portrait, at 28 years old, depicted as “Jesus Christ”.

Dürer, one of the main creators of the Renaissance rules, he self-portrait at the age in which he considered to have reached his physical perfection. Furthermore, in humans is well known assortative pairing for age, (Spuhler 1968, Mascie-Taylor 1987; Hollingshead 1950; Klein 1996). Age patterns of marriage partners have been explained in terms of societal norms regarding an acceptable age relation within a couple (e.g., Lewis/Spanier 1979; Spanier/Glick 1980).

The core assumption is that men and women internalize socially shared conceptions about a “normal” partnership during the course of their socialization. Age-related mate preferences should be discuss in the background of (a) social norms and (b) social exchange and (c) a market perspective on partner preferences. The measurement of preferences comprises two methodological approaches: First, a preference can be measured via self-report data surveyed by questionnaire items assessing the characteristics of an ideal mate. Second, in contrast, one can also observe actual choices of individuals and thereby virtually “reveal” their preferences.

The more “looks” are rated as a relevant partner feature, the more likely women are to state a preference for younger or almost equal partners. In other words, age preferences are partially a trade-off function of preferences for physical attractiveness and assortative mating or homogamy by age —not only for men but also for women. Furthermore, the more women emphasized education / wealth as an important partner feature, the stronger their age preference shift from equal / doesn’t matter to almost equal / older men.

Thus, women’s age preferences seemed to be confounded with preferences for educational (and hence economic) status. But Thao Ha et al 2009 tested that male social status does not strongly affect mating desire on female teens and at their first twenty.

Another study [Gil-Burmann et al 2002] found women under 40 years old seek mainly physical attractiveness in men, whereas majority over 40, females past their fertile period, want trade-off between resources -socioeconomic status and attractiveness.

Western women are economically independent and they are just following their sexual instincts straight into being choosier and increasing their mate standards according to the natural female human biology:

1- Preferences for a universally agreed on phenotypic quality (such as physical attractiveness):

a) Facial attractiveness is the most important for young adults (i.e., at an age of maximum reproductive ability and activity), and of little importance for old people [Rooney (2006); Thao Ha (2009); Burmann (2002); etc]. The older a person is the older the faces they prefer and this effect is more pronounced in female judges [Buss 1999]. The rating of physical attractiveness perceived is own-age linked. Thus young persons tend to prefer youthful facial traits.

b) Both men and women desire attractive sexual partners, the more attractive the better. [Burley (1983), Kalick & Hamilton (1986); Ellis and Kelley (1999) [Asendorpf et al. 2011, Back et al. 2011] [Hitsch et al. 2010, Shaw Taylor et al. 2011], c) Male age is not linked to fertility cues but physical attractiveness is indicative of underlying genetic fitness and and health.

2-Decision criteria can include preferences for similarity (homophily).

3- Mate choice systems include interactions limited by geographical, social space and socio-environmental constraints. Young women make their date selection from within their local neighborhoods, college classmates, friends, social networks, etc. Generally men of their range of age.

4- The impact of social norms. We could expect that norms prescribe preferences for “directed” similarity (similar age, but man slightly older). Alternatively, as Bytheway (1981) argues, age-related partnership norms might lose their relevance for choices by older persons. If this is the case, we expect to observe more idiosyncrasies in the age preferences of older individuals and, what is crucial here, an increasing alignment of age preferences in men and women among older age groups.

Before women entered into the workforce, so main reason that women married wealthy men was for financial support. If money is no longer a necessity, they can look for high phenotypical quality men. In the Western world, gender equality, the sexual revolution, and in particular the advent of the contraceptive pill has given women more freedom for choosing a partner. The contraceptive pill brought about a distinction between childbearing and sexuality, enabling women to choose to be with a partner who suited them but who was not necessarily the most suitable partner to bear children with (usually an older man with a relatively good income).

The pill also gave women the option of delaying childbirth or rejecting the notion of having children altogether. Simply women are increasingly of similar education and income levels to men, are taking on senior roles in the workplace, and are gaining more status. The age gap distribution in undevelopment countries show us that education, urbanization, economic independence is key in determining at what age women marry, and depressing spousal age gap. Large spousal age differences are especially found at polygynous unions:


Functional and Phylogenetic explanations for female preferences based on age: Here, I am going to argue that consideration of functional and phylogenetic level explanations for age preferences can drive hypothesis generation at the causal and ontogenetic explanatory levels. That is, male age cues to attractiveness may be usually posited to relate to some aspect of underlying, physiological health (Coetzee et al., 2009), since individuals who show preferences for mating with healthy individuals will have increased reproductive success (see Kokko et al., 2003 ).

a) Paternal Age and Mutational Load. Paternal age is a significant driver of the human mutation rate, likely the main driver. Obviously this implies that many medical problems are more common in the children of older fathers, which is known to be the case. Less obviously, it implies that a population that has had high average paternal age for a long time will have a higher-than-average mutational load. This may well explain preliminary results that seem to show such differences.

Observed differences in paternal age are large enough to generate the sort of differences that have been observed so far. For example, judging from the Decode study, the mutation rate in a population with an average paternal age of 34 would be > 20% higher than that in a population with an average paternal age of 28. The question is that mildly deleterious mutations, ones that reduce fitness by something like 1%, are considerably more common than ones that drastically reduce fitness.

This makes sense, because most non-synonymous mutations, ones that change an amino acid in a protein, don’t cause a big decrease in fitness. A few do, as when a mutation turns an amino acid into a stop codon, truncating the protein. Greg Cochran points out that:

“Note that this describes the spectrum of new mutations. The distribution of existing deleterious mutations in a population is quite different. Dominant lethal mutations are not passed on; hence do not build up with time. The dominant lethals you see are all new, freshly generated by mutation. On the other hand, a mutation that reduces fitness by 1% is only slowly eliminated by purifying selection, so its frequency builds up with time. Its equilibrium frequency is 100 times higher than that of a dominant lethal that occurs equally often. Deleterious mutations in the genome is an important variable in health and disease.” ( Greg Cochran, West Hunter.

Furthermore deleterious mutations interact synergistically causing impaired performance in individual systems and this leads to a positive correlation between the total number of deleterious mutations in the genome and impaired performance across the whole spectrum of biological capability. This includes performance in intellectual tasks, sporting ability, the ability to fight disease and preserve health and the development of a symmetrical physical form.

Sexual reproduction distributes deleterious mutations unequally amongst zygotes and Z will correlate negatively with zygote mutational load. Rising environmental mutagenesis will lead to a rise in the human genomic mutational load and to decrease Z, although the full effect would take several generations. So that a marked rise in environmental mutagenesis would lead to species extinction if mate choice were random, i.e., unrelated to the genomic mutational load.

The biological imperfections caused by mutations, however, in health, intelligence and physical symmetry are all, to varying degrees, related to sexual attraction. Thefore if mates are chosen in response to sexual attraction the species can be maintained in the presence of high environmental mutagenesis.


1) John Haldane subsequently proposed that children inherit more mutations from their fathers than their mothers (Haldane, J. B. S. Ann. Eugen. 13, 262–271 (1947).)

2) More­over, a study published in Nature finds that the age at which a father sires children determines how many mutations those offspring inherit (Kong, A. et al. Nature 488, 471–475 (2012).)

3) Some Papers published that identified dozens of new mutations implicated in autism and found that the mutations were four times more likely to originate on the father’s side than the mother’s: Sanders, S. J. et al. Nature 485, 237–241 (2012). Neale, B. M. et al. Nature 485, 242–245 (2012). O’Roak, B. J. et al. Nature 485, 246–250 (2012).

4) Older fathers pass on more genetic mutations, study shows:

b) Age as A Factor In Physical Fitness.

Several experimental studies have found female preferences for male figures with a medium body mass index and a pronounced upper body v-shape, a likely indication of a mesomorphic, muscular physique and, thus, physical fitness (Dixson, Halliwell, East, Wignarajah, & Anderson, 2003; Furnham & Baguma 1994; Horvath, 1981; Lavrakas, 1975; but see Gitter, Lomranz, & Saxe, 1982 for conflicting results).

Moreover, two correlational studies using more realistic stimuli supported these experimental results: Fan, Dai, Liu, and Wu (2005), using 3D wire frame film clips, and Maisey, Vale, Cornelissen, and Tovee (1999), using front view photographs, found male bodies with low body mass index, broad pectoral, and small waists to be attractive for women. Older males secrete luteinizing hormone and testosterone more irregularly, and jointly more asynchronously, than younger males: And men tend to maintain their peak levels of muscular strength and endurance, aerobic power, and cardiovascular fitness until age 30. After 30 there is a gradual decline throughout their lives: Imagen

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

77 Responses to Do Women Prefer Older Men? Debunking The Myth

  1. Live-Evil says:

    Great work again, really astounded by your writing. Just out of curiosity, what is your education background?

    • tyrionlannister69 says:

      Very grateful again. My academic field is engineering, but I’m used to read about astronomy, physics, cosmology, anthropology, molecular genetics, evolutionary biology, so on…So I’m a big fan of any scientific stuff.

  2. RickyRaw says:

    I like your blog, a lot.
    Those “red pillers” that make up the manosphere, haven’t swallowed the thing whole until they read your blog.

    Now, I know no one likes unsolicited advice, but your blog should have a different name. Something catchy and not something seemingly convoluted with a 69 after it. Maybe something like, “marginaltruths” or “gameuncloaked”.Change the name and link up to other manosphere bloggers and you will create some damage into the egos and scam artists that thrive in this side of the blogging world.

  3. Are you trying to imply that incel men in the west are all genetically deformed and undesirable?

    many men on are healthy, intelligent, decently men who is deemed undesirable by the dating scene.

    I work in the STEM field myself as I have an aptitude for math and science. Physically I am very strong and powerful. I hardly ever gotten sick (as opposed to the nerds I go to school with who actually have many health problems).

    Are incel men who are both intelligent and healthy have “undesirable genes”?

    • Living it up Saturday Night says:

      That’s probably the case. Without genetic reproduction, your genes will never spread, thereby by definition making you genetically inferior. Though you could always donate your sperm to a high-IQ sperm bank to spread your genes far and wide, thereby making yourself a genetic success. You should consider it.

  4. Norman says:

    What do you know about the male preference for younger women? I’ve read about a couple of studies in which men rated female faces that looked about 14 the most attractive. LOL.

    • The Cockroach says:

      They analyzed a year’s worth of sexual searches and wrote about the results.

      • Norman says:

        @ The Cockroach

        Wow, nice graph. Here’s another with similar results. As part of the documentary “Are all men pedophiles?” several thousand men on the internet were shown pictures of girls and women of all ages and, without being informed of their age, were asked if they found them sexually desirable.

        This is also in close agreement with my prediction about male preferences in this diagram:

      • Norman says:

        Where’s my reply gone? What was wrong?

      • Norman says:

        @ sirtyrionlannister

        The source for what? The figures in the second graph? I’ve looked at a lot of anthropological statistics and the best estimate of the typical age prehistoric girls would have their first pregnancy is about 17.

        If men have evolved to try to monopolise girls’ reproductive lifespans the best girls to go for would have been those under 17 before they got impregnated by any other men. A man could’ve aimed really young say, 7, to give himself a guarantee that she hasn’t been impregnated by any other men but the price he would pay for that guarantee is that he’d have to wait about a decade before he could start getting any offspring from her. At the other extreme a man could aim for girls right just prior the beginning of their reproductive lifespans at 16 so the time he’d have to wait before his wife would start giving him offspring would at an absolute minimum. But the price he’d pay for doing that would be that he could never be sure that the first offspring from her was actually his. Being so close to the age of first pregnancy there’s a chance she could already be carrying another man’s baby.

        So, a man needed to aim for girls close to the beginning of their reproductive lifespans but not too close. It’s difficult to judge exactly where but my hunch is about 14. Young enough to be reasonably confident she isn’t already carrying another man’s baby but not too far away from the age at which she’d start reproducing.

        If this prediction is right we should expect to see a peak in a girl’s popularity in the sex market at about 14 and a sharp drop after 16, since by then in prehistory she would have been impregnated by another man. The two graphs above about internet search statistics and attractiveness ratings support this prediction very well.

    • sirtyrionlannister says:


      Female attractive faces clearly show characteristic features of babyfaceness, but at the same time it also includes mature female features like high, prominent cheek bones and concave cheeks which are accentuated evenly by using make-up.

      Dr. Martin Gruendl computed an “average child face” using four original images. Subsequently, he selected several attractive woman faces. By using the morphing technique gradually warped the facial shape of the female faces into the shape of the scheme of childlike characteristics.The results of this experiment show clearly that childlike characteristics (large, round eyes, a large curved forehead as well as small short nose and chin) can enhance attractiveness. Only very few (9,5%) test subjects rated mature “original women” as being most attractive. Most of the preferred female faces contained childlike proportions of 10 – 50%.

      Doug Jones worked with a sample of U.S. female models has significantly more neotenous facial proportions than a sample of U .S. female undergraduates and a strikingly low predicted
      age, about 7 years, accordingt o regression equations predicting age as a function of facial proportions.

      The implication is that the female attractiveness-neoteny association reported here may reflect, at least in part, something other than an attractiveness-fecundity relationship. I am willing to take Jones’s word that the female models’ predicted age of about 7 years does not mean that their faces are identical to those of 7-year-old girls, but still, the models’ “age” is considerably lower than that of an average sample of 20-year-old women whose very high fecundity men should have been selected to find extremely attractive.

      Again, might neoteny elicit something other than just sexual attraction? The answer may lie in Jones’s n.3, where he mentions that neotenous features probably act as a release for parental behavior. Among other things, such behavior entails providing for and giving protection to individuals who are relatively dependent upon oneself. It could thus be argued that in the past neotenous adult females benefited disproportionately from male provisioning – in which case neoteny would not be the result of sexual selection.”

      • Norman says:

        @ sirtyrionlannister

        Jones predicted that 7 year old girls have the most attractive facial dimensions? I think he must’ve got the maths a bit wrong. 14 or 12 maybe but not as young as 7. Girls that young aren’t that popular in the non-nude modelling industry. A girl’s popularity usually peaks at about 12 or 14. The faces of anime girls are usually based on girls about that age too. Though, off the top of my head, I think Helen of Troy and Snow White were judged to have become the most attractive in the land at the age of 7, so maybe there actually is something special about the faces of girls of that age.

        • sirtyrionlannister says:

          Well let me explain, I was talking about regression equations as a function of facial proportions, not real female faces rated. Jones evolved a computer program generated a small population of faces (first generation of phenotypes) from a set of random binary strings (genotypes). Genotypes specified the shapes and soft tissue anthropometrics of facial features. By the other hand, using facial morphings, Cunningham and Perret found that higher beauty ratings were for those faces who possessed full lips and a thin and childish chin, typical of a 11 year old girl.

          Facial markers which indicate hormone levels often affect how attractive a face is perceived. Women with greater oestrogen levels are generally considered to be more feminine, attractive, and healthy, with fuller lips and smaller lower jaws. (Law Smith 2006). Thus high levels of oestrogen correlate with high fertility in women, this might mean that – as with youth – these features are attractive because they are indications of a good mate in biological and evolutionary terms. My thoughts

          a) Evolutionary models have predicted that what men desire is not youth per se, but rather features of women that are associated with reproductive value or fertility. Female mates who display cues to youth and beauty, known signs of fertility. And fertility peak around at age 20-24.

          b) Evolutionary psychologists suggest that men area also attracted to signs of nulliparity. According to D. Symons one reason is because men are interested in the property of female fertility, men want to father all their children. The second hypothesis is the correlation between fertility and the first birth. In Paleolithic the best way to pair up with a fertile woman was when she was teenager before she began to give birth babies, thus maybe men are hardwired to prefer mate a woman before she peaks their fertility,( i.e so-called higher reproductive potential).

          c) Some studies show clearly that babyfaceness characteristics (large, round eyes, a large curved forehead as well as small short nose and chin) enhance beauty. Most of the preferred female faces contained childlike proportions of 10 – 50%. This means that even the most attractive women become even more beautiful, if facial proportions are made more childlike.

          d) The facial markers which indicate hormone levels often affect how attractive a face is perceived. Women with greater oestrogen levels are generally considered to be more feminine, attractive, and healthy, with fuller lips and smaller lower jaws. (Law Smith 2006). Thus high levels of oestrogen correlate with high fertility in women.

          Therefore maximum physical attractiveness in females is is in the range from 15 to 24, from post-pubescent to mid-twenties. (Where the overall combination of fertility and fecundity is at its peak). Post-pubescent girls begin to have mature features that distinguish them from pre-pubescent girls (without secondary sexual feautures).

      • Norman says:

        BTW I think this is the closest to the perfect female face I’ve ever seen. It’s Jaroslava Schallerová from Valerie And Her Week Of Wonders who was 13 at the time of filming.

        • sirtyrionlannister says:

          I agree regarding facial beauty in female teenagers, but peak of body attractiveness (secondary sex characteristic) rise later. Approximately two years after the onset of puberty (a girl’s first menstrual cycle), the hormone estrogen stimulates the development and growth of the glandular, fat, and suspensory tissues that compose the breast. This continues for approximately four years until establishing the final shape of the breast (size, volume, density) when she is a woman of approximately 18-21 years of age.

      • Norman says:

        @ sirtyrionlannister

        I disagree a bit there. I’ve seen plenty of models (Oxi/Anya y148, Tanya y157, Sandra model, Sandy Webe model etc) grow through adolescence into to adulthood and peak not only in facial attractiveness but also bodily attractiveness at about 14. Men have evolved to find signs of nulliparity and female immaturity highly attractive as they imply a girl still has the whole of her reproductive lifespan ahead off her so a girl with a slightly immature petite body is generally more attractive than a fully developed 20yr old.

        Have you ever seen footage from a traditional hunter gatherer society? Try watching “Tears in The Amazon” and take a good look at the girls and women. In these societies, by the time a women is about 20 she has already had a baby and it shows. Her breasts have lost a lot of their adolescent perkiness, her stomach has stretch marks and the stresses of pregnancy and motherhood show in her face. The girls in their adolescence before motherhood are without a doubt the most attractive. The breasts are perky, their midrifts are tight and pristine, their faces are young and fresh.

        Breast attractiveness is quite interesting. What men value the most is not breast size but pertness.This makes sense since pertness would have been an honest signal of nulliparity. Adolescence breasts may have actually evolved to advertise that a girl hasn’t started reproducing yet. As I pointed out, breast feeding and pregnancy take a heavy toll on a breasts and turn them saggy. A perky pair of breasts on an adolescent girl would have been a signal saying “Look! I’m young and haven’t started reproducing yet… but I’m close to doing so.” The male preference for young perky breasts would have co-evolved with this signalling.

        So, girls in natural fertility populations clearly peak in bodily attractiveness before they start reproducing at 17 or so. In our society women generally retain their adolescent attractive for longer since they start reproducing later and use beautifying technologies like make-up and bras to make them look more like pert-breasted, fresh-faced adolescent girls. Nevertheless, their adolescent attractiveness is still lost. I imagine that because prehistoric men focused their efforts on acquiring girls before about 17 when they start reproducing, girls have evolved to invest the most in bodily attractiveness before that age and deteriorate afterwards as their attractiveness would have become less and less important.

        Schopenhauer understood the principle:

        “With young girls Nature seems to have had in view what, in the language of the drama, is called a striking effect; as for a few years she dowers them with a wealth of beauty and is lavish in her gift of charm, at the expense of all the rest of their life; so that during those years they may capture the fantasy of some man to such a degree that he is hurried away into undertaking the honorable care of them, in some form or other, as long as they live—a step for which there would not appear to be any sufficient warranty if reason only directed his thoughts. Accordingly, Nature has equipped woman, as she does all her creatures, with the weapons and implements requisite for the safeguarding of her existence, and for just as long as it is necessary for her to have them. Here, as elsewhere, Nature proceeds with her usual economy; for just as the female ant, after fecundation, loses her wings, which are then superfluous, nay, actually a danger to the business of breeding; so, after giving birth to one or two children, a woman generally loses her beauty; probably, indeed, for similar reasons.”

      • Norman says:

        Vulval attractiveness definitely peaks in a girl’s adolescence years. The vulvas that get posted in “Post up the best looking pussies” threads on porn sites always look like they belong to girls about 12 or 14. They are nice and neat with little or no pubic hair and have a virginal, slightly immature look about them. That’s simply what men find the most attractive and it makes biological sense. A vulva that’s tight and fresh looking is a sign that the girl it belongs to hasn’t started reproducing yet and still has all of her fertile years ahead of her.

      • Norman says:

        Another simple honest advertisement of nulliparity (which implies high future reproductive potential) is a flat stomach with no stretch marks. This is probably the biological reason adolescent girls like to wear short tops that expose their flat stomachs.

    • :-p says:

      Men who prefer 13 year olds are not average men. But no duh they lurk about in the bowels of the internet and search for tweens. If the average man went for 14 year olds over women then they wouldn’t be considered deviants, now would they?

  5. Norman says:

    Here’s some polls (for straight men) on female attractiveness I’ve been posting around. I thought you might find them interesting.

    Which is more important? A girl’s face or body?

    What’s best? Small perky boobs or big heavy boobs?

    How do you prefer pubic hair on a woman?

  6. rugby11ljh says:

    That was a good read.

  7. Bernd says:

    Was some paedophilic attraction adaptive in ancestral times? I thought you might find this interesting,

    • sirtyrionlannister says:

      Over 99% of human history, when there was no contraceptive, women used to be constantly pregnant or breastfeeding after giving birth for the first time. An average woman followed the childbearing pattern of having children from 16 (the age of menarche on neolitic) to 42 years old, so she was pregnant for 6 years and breastfeeding for 8 years. Since breastfeeding full-time mothers didnt ovulate and didnt have menstrual periods, they couldnt get pregnant, at least for some months.

      She had 26 cycles of ovulation with 3 fertile days each one, which means she would have been able to conceive 78 days among 8030 days, (i.e 1% of the time). Before birth control in twentieth century, the best way to find a fertile woman was pick up a teen girl before she began her childbearing years. That’s why men prefer female nubile signs before peak of fertility. It is like signing the contract a few years before starting work. (See Donald Symons, Margie Profet).

      I think that could be adaptative a male attraction for female nubile signs at the menarche age. Since that paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children (generally age 11 years or younger), I’d say that it’s maybe it is caused by a failed mechanism of runaway selection that leads to the pathology.

      • Bernd says:

        OK, I don’t think you really understood any of that post.

        In order for a man to monopolise a girl’s reproductive lifespan and get as many offspring from her as possible he would have had to acquire her before she got pregnant by any other man. A certain amount of paedophilic attraction may have been adaptive since it would have motivated men to purse and acquire girls before reproductive age.

        Also, the age of menarche in prehistory was probably about 13, the same as in modern properly nourished societies. In many modern foraging societies it may be 16+ but that’s because they’re living in marginal habitats and aren’t properly nourished. It’s a common misconception that menarche marks the beginning of fertility. A girl’s ovaries don’t usually start releasing eggs until several years after menarche. That’s why the prehistoric age of first pregnancy wasn’t until 16 or so even though menarche was about 13.

        • sirtyrionlannister says:

          Yeah, that men are also attracted to signs of nulliparity. Men are interested in the property of female fertility, men want to father all their children. I am familiar with this hypothesis, rather not underestimate my understanding!

      • Bernd says:

        I don’t you really understand much, you just seem to copy and paste stuff from Wikipedia.

      • Bernd says:

        *I don’t think you

    • :-p says:

      *insert vomiting sound of your choice here*

  8. FrancisChalk says:

    “These data are crushing. This initial analysis of census data suggests that the extent of the older man vs. younger woman couple is exaggerated by the manosphere. This data represents a break from this wrong view, meaning that most desirable women under 25 (on their peak of beauty) do not marry middle aged men (over 40), because despite the financial support is currently no longer a necessity for women.”
    Your chart simply doesn’t support your conclusions. From your chart (Age Differences for Spouses), in 53.3% of married couples the man is at least 2 years older than the women, whereas in only 14.8% of couples is the women greater than 2 years older. An effect size of 3.6 times greater is statistically quite significant. Further, in your sample range of greater than 5 years older, the effect size blooms to 4.6 times–a very significant variation. Statistically, your data does not in any way refute the assertion that younger women have a strong bias towards marrying older men. In fact, it quite solidly supports such an observation.

    • sirtyrionlannister says:

      I’m sorry but your reading comprehension is lacking. Of course the data tell us there are greater proportion of women married to men a few years older than themselves, while the inverse dynamics is more rare. But in no way twentysomething girls are wanting guys in their 40′s. (which is the fallacy on sexual male mate value that some dudes on manosphere and their acolytes argue),

      • FrancisChalk says:

        So, your analysis is not (despite the seeming abundance of charts and data) akin to actual research conducted in a scientific manor, ok. You’re just essentially “spouting off” about supposed unsourced claims in the “manosphere” that “twentysomething girls are wanting guys in their 40′s.” Fine, it’s your blog write what you want. But I’d caution others reading your blog that your assertions may appear data-based; however, you fail to even exercise the barest modicum of scientific rigor in your analysis. Is your hypothesis: “do women prefer older men,” as the title of your post portends? If so, then the data provided demonstrates quite clearly that women do indeed prefer older men, as I pointed out in my original post. If your hypothesis is: “I’m going to debunk what some dudes say in the manosphere that girls under 25 dig 40-year-olds,” then by all means, write on, but please don’t act as if you’re proceeding in a scientifically-based manor–your not.

        • Subliminal Portal says:

          @FrancisChalk. His biggest mistake in this blog upon writing his article was placing a blind faith in the scientific fraudster Dr. Kari Stefansson and DeCode Genetics. I could give everyone on this blog sheet a whole earful on why Dr. Kari Stefansson and DeCode Genetics are not to be trusted.

      • Bernd says:


        The man’s a cock, it’s not worth trying to reason with him.

  9. Macgyver says:


    Look dude, you’re just an annoying troll, and I do understand your efforts to criticize the data and studies, since empirical knowledge is contradicting some of the main principles of your ridiculous PUA communities.

    Since your lack of arguments, it seems you’re induced to criticize purely semantic nuances on scientific blogs, therefore criticize the semantic meaning of the title is the only thing that y you can bring on here.

    So first, the question isn’t whether the title should say “old men” or “men a years senior than them”. The text explains perfectly that preferences for teenage females and girls in their 20’s are, ranging, on average, from their own age to several years older. Anyhow this pattern of preference for slightly older men does not extend to all demographic age, since mating trend is that great number of women over 30’s are seeking for meeting men a handful of years younger while they do not want anyone more than a few years older than them. So the rigorous ” some years older” preference would only be attributable for women below 30.

    So please, stop trolling on here and better return to your magic PUA blogs, where male looks don’t matter, where men over 30 can score young pussy with ease, and where cows fly.

    • sirtyrionlannister says:


      These commenters are some of the henchmen of Rollo Tommasi. I made the mistake of linking my post on there and left some comments. It’s like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a gang of monkeys. So my efforts are better spent talking to open-minded and smart people.

  10. Peter says:

    Ignore them. That kind of pua sites belong to a lot of obnoxious, scathing, unscientific and scammers like Tomassi, RooshV, or Heartiste, who marketing this bullshit, which, aren’t just an unending source of ludicrously overcooked lies.

    The sad part is that they are plagued with naive followers, who idolize these babblers. On the one hand, giving a glimmer of hope to a myriad of unhappy deprived men whose sexual dissatisfaction makes them seek refuge in these blogs. These babblers tells those frustrated men what they want to hear. They dip them into a dreamy world where there are no barriers regardless of your age or your physical appearance.

  11. Peter says:

    @ Bernd,

    How are you trying to contribute to this discussion, with your pedophiles comments? I think that Sir Tyrion has more important things to do than listen to your pathological nonsense.

  12. Macgyver says:

    Reblogged this on The Mating Mind.

  13. Tarnished says:

    Fantastic display of actual knowledge and empirical data. I imagine that PUAs hate it though. As you well know, much of the manosphere engages in mental masturbatory techniques regarding female mating patterns…Namely, that male looks don’t matter in the slightest, that women are only attracted to resources and socioeconomic status, and those who are adept at running proper “Game” with or without “Dread” have somehow cracked a magical Evo psych code. Not only that, but there’s a lot of schadenfreude among various bloggers, thinking that the exact same women who wouldn’t date them in their 20s will *literally* come crawling to them on hands and knees the moment said women turn 30. It almost certainly happens to some guys, but it’s hardly an epidemic like they want to claim.

    I will go on record as stating that my personal life,unfortunately, throws a wrench in your data…or is at least in the very minority. I am not married nor in a committed relationship, but I have been in a FwB arrangement from age 22 to my current age of 30 with a man 15 years my senior. (He is, thusfar, my only sexual partner but that is through my own choice, not because we’re actually exclusive.) However, his genes have been kind to him, and although he’s always been a…solidly built…guy, his only real sign of physical aging is his lightly graying hair. Thus, he *is* a good deal older than me yet doesn’t look it. He is still the same level of attractive that he was 8 years ago when he looked like he was in his late 20s, but was actually 37.

    I offer up this example as a potential explanation for why a minority of women (2.3%, according to your graph above) have partners much older than themselves. It is a definite possibility that they were initially unaware of how old their partner was till after attraction had been found. Of course, mine is purely anecdotal evidence, and I am not married to my sex partner, so it doesn’t make much of a difference regardless. Just something to ponder.

    • Subliminal Portal says:

      Poverty is no aphrodisiac. At least not for men trying to hook up with women.

      • Tarnished says:

        Where did I say it was?

        • Subliminal Portal says:

          You’re right, you didn’t; and I mean no disrespect. However, here is my point. When I lived in California so many years ago, I saw a pattern of attractive women in their early twenties (even late teens) zeroing in on happy marriages and stealing middle-aged men from their same-aged wives. Many of these men had money and status. You might remember hearing about the case of Elisabeth Broderick that took place out in San Diego so many years ago. She was in her forties and her attorney husband, Dan Broderick, was having an affair behind her back with a significantly younger woman named Linda Kolkena whom he eventually married. The situation turned ugly among the three after Dan Broderick divorced Elisabeth Broderick and married Linda Kolkena, and Elisabeth Broderick eventually shot and killed her ex-husband, Dan Broderick, and his significantly younger wife, Linda Kolkena. Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t believe that most relationships between 20 and 30-something-old women with significantly older middle-aged men end up going down this same shameful path. In fact, I believe that usually the age difference creates a more solid foundation of stability in comparison to same-age relationships. However, if everything in sirtyrionlannister’s above online article were accurate right on cue, I don’t think California would have an epidemic of younger women stealing away significantly older men from their middle-aged wives as it does. These men these young women zero in on have money. Materialism is still a very strong force in young women’s decisions on whom they hook up with. At least in California it is. This trend doesn’t seem as noticeable here on the east coast of the United States of America, but it’s still there. Therefore, how can I not question the precision and integrity of sirtyrionlannister’s online article? But, yeah, I do get your point about young women hooking up with significantly older men that they mistake to be their same age. I’ve known women who emphatically stated that they would never date outside their own generation only to find themselves becoming freaked out upon realizing that their seemingly 28-year-old boyfriend is really pushing 40 or 50 years old. That is, he’s been blessed with the same secret of youth that actors Brad Pitt and John Stamos have been blessed with rather than showing his true age in his physical features like Michael Chiklis and Steve Wilkos.

          • Zoey says:

            Actually, you can easily find news stories about younger men with older women. Just look at the slew of recent arrests of high school teachers who have had illicit affairs with 13-16 year old students. There is a new one happening every day. Many of these women are so infatuated by their students that they will go on to marry them after serving time in jail, or become repeat offenders. Many of these women are also married to men their age. And don’t chalk it up to a disorder/pathology. These boys are 13+ so the women aren’t pedophiles, and it’s happening all the time.

            • Subliminal Star says:

              It’s interesting that you mention that, Zoey. There was a recent case in North Carolina in which a female teacher in her forties became pregnant by a 15-year-old male student. She was subsequently arrested and charged with statutory rape. However, the boy’s parents did not object to the relationship, and they consented to the 15-year-old boy marrying this woman. After he did so, the prosecutor in that matter was forced to drop the criminal charges against the woman, because the spousal privilege between the 15-year-old boy and the 40-something-year-old female teacher legally barred the prosecutor from compelling the 15-year-old boy to testify against his 40-something-year-old wife. The whole legal irony of it is that strict liability offenses like statutory rape and carnal knowledge of a minor are almost impossible for a defense attorney to defend in court of law, unless, of course, the defendant in such a case didn’t do it at all. In this situation, the woman was pregnant with the teenage boy’s child, so there was no question that she did have sexual relations with him. She and the teenage boy were just lucky enough to find a legal loophole to get the law off their backs.

            • Subliminal Star says:

              Zoey? In further response to your comment regarding older women and teenage boys, here is an online article that you’ll likely find interesting.>>>Click onto

  14. Subliminal Portal says:

    Those so-called studies claiming that older fathers are more likely to pass on genetic defects and mutations to their offspring is a load of bullshit. I read all about Dr. Kari Stefansson’s so-called research and nowhere did he actually do any kind of statistical study of birth-defected children that showed that more of them had fathers over 45 years of age than ones under 45. He and his group DeCode Genetics are wheelers and dealers who are only interested in the almighty dollar. I can only question how many special interest groups paid him and his organization to produce this phony data about older fathers. I can certainly see a lot of psychiatrists with dollar signs in their eyes in response to this so-called research of his now that this charlatan and his organization have kids born to older fathers believing that they could develop bipolar disorder or schizophrenia someday. Dr. Kari Stefansson and DeCode Genetics engage in unethical practices that should cause everyone to question their scientific determinations. In 2004, they were sued for stock fraud.>>>Click onto

    • Subliminal Portal says:

      And another thing. If there are people stupid enough to join the Church of Scientology, then I guess there will be people who will allow themselves to be suckered into believing everything that charlatans like Dr. Kari Stefansson and DeCode Genetics puts out to the public.

  15. Subliminal Portal says:

    I read your article from beginning to end. So what’s the point of it? Is it supposed to suggest that the Western World is better off being this same-age-appropriate Utopia, so to speak, in the area of relationships and marriages that rewards all the prima donnas of the world? For many years on the TLC television show “19 Kids and Counting,” Michelle Duggar bragged about how she was 14 years old and her husband, Jim Bob Duggar, was 15 years old when they first started dating. And how they timed their marriage and child-bearing years so perfectly. They boasted about being the picture perfect family for wholesome American values and traditions. Their oldest kids followed in their footsteps and got married before 23 years of age and started producing kids. Then along came the big bombshell that dropped right on them and everyone who thought that they were the icons of the prima donna pop culture that Janis Ian sang about in her 1975 song “At Seventeen” where she describes how beauty queens marry into everything they need and then retire. Their oldest son, Josh Duggar, gets outed to the whole world for having sexually molested a 5-year-old girl when he was in high school. Yeah, he followed in his father’s footsteps and got married and started a family in his early twenties. I hate to rain on your parade, but nobody is any better than anyone else just because they’ve gotten luckier breaks in life along the lines of relationships and marriage. The public’s propensity to believe so is a delusion that continues to screw up our society to high heaven. And whenever some self-proclaimed expert or scientist attempts to promote this hierarchical way of thinking, I always dig deep into that individual’s background to find out whatever I can about him or her, and usually I find out stuff that is not so pretty.

  16. QwertyBox says:


    It’s not directly related to this post but I thought you might be interested in this paper about the evolution of women’s sex drive. In the societies in which we evolved women weren’t as free to choice their partners as they are today.

  17. Zoey says:

    29 year old woman here. I’m happily married, but if I were single, I know I’d be dating guys UNDER 30 exclusively. I prefer younger guys around 23-28. I think this article is dead-on about men peaking in their mid-to-late 20’s.

    You hear these arguments against older women such as: they are more stuck in their ways, they have a high partner count, they have saggy, crepey skin, etc. All of these arguments apply to men too. I wouldn’t want a guy who racked up 20+ partners in his lifetime (and all the baggage that comes with it), with sagging sun-damaged skin, a beer belly, and a narrow-minded worldview. I’m not saying all older guys are like that, but if you’re reading this and you’re one of those PUAs who has ever said those things about older women, then you’ve got to understand where i’m coming from. A girl can equally be turned off by those things in the opposite sex.

    I figured that my preferences were weird because I’ve heard so many guys (and only guys) argue that women prefer older men and that men age like fine wine. The thing is, that never actually aligned with my own experience. All of my girlfriends are with guys around their own age, give or take 2 years. When I was 15 I had a lot of girl friends, and none of them expressed any interest in my 40 year old stepdad or even my 21 year old stepbrother. But I knew more than a handful of girls who were crazy about my cousin, who was 2 years younger than us. There was never any slumber party talk about older male celebrities. We had crushes on boy band singers who were 2-3 years older than us, max. As we grew older, that preference for guys within 2 years of our own age never changed. And now, approaching 30, we’re getting to the point where guys 4-5 years younger than us can actually look manly and be considered attractive. There were times when I thought a guy was attractive and also thought he was near my age, only to find out he was 23 years old. I’m sure most men can relate to this experience.

    • Zoey says:

      And just to be clear, I also think women peak young (say, 19-23). I want to make it clear that i’m not one of those women who argue that 30 is the new 20 and women should go out and be cougars. It just seems obvious to me that youth and beauty are highly correlated in both sexes. Men just need an extra 5-10 years to shed their babyface while still having the tight skin and firmness of youth. But both peak relatively early in life. It’s wishful thinking at best to say that a guy’s peak is 35-40, an age when most would be close to death in the wild or in ancient times.

  18. melanie says:

    LIAR! It’s a proven fact that men prefer women in theirs 20s. You can google it.

    • Norman says:


      • Norman says:

        Yet more evidence that men instinctively prefer adolescent girls. A recent international study has found that men generally find the figure of women with a BMI about 17-20 the most attractive. This corresponds to skinny 19y r olds or average 13yr olds.

        • Norman says:

          BMI 17-20?

          • Tarnished says:

            From the link:

            Here is the problem I have with this study. I could not find any data indicating that the average BMI of 18-20 year olds fell within the optimal BMI range of 17-20. Wiki shows that females age 10-15 on average fell within the optimal BMI range.

            The original study also states that the majority of people initially chose a BMI of 19. After the researchers added approximate ages for the models, that’s when the range changed/went lower. A majority of men (and women, as the study had both sexes answering the questions) thinking a 19 BMI is most attractive makes better sense, because at that point sexual fertility indicators like hips, breasts, and buttocks have become developed. A BMI of 17 doesn’t have this, and in fact creates a more boyish figure, not to mention being deemed very unhealthy starting at age 18 or so. After all, a certain amount of fat is required for basic fertility…if one is too skinny, one cannot bear children.  One of my younger sisters is finding this out now, as she is 20 and has a BMI of just barely 18. Her gyno has recommended that she put on at least 10 lbs before trying to conceive.

            • Norman says:

              The point is that the models rated the most attractive were those that most closely resembled girls about 13. A BMI of 19 is much below average for a 19 year old but normal for a 13 year old. If the study used real 13 year olds no doubt they would have rated the most attractive.

              Presumably the reason men find a BMI about 19 the most attractive is that (on average) it’s a sign of youth and that a girl is still in her adolescent years. Being that young would mean that she hasn’t quite yet reached reproductive age still has all her fertile years ahead of her and will be capable of giving a man more offspring than an older women or teen that has used up some of her fertile years.

              Look at the graph. A BMI of 19 is average for 13 year olds.

              • Tarnished says:

                I suppose, but the study had both male and female takers. If we accept your reasoning for the men, what would be the corresponding reasoning for the women?

                And yes, a BMI of 19 is definitely possible for a 13 year old. I hit puberty at age 10, and looked like I was 16 when I was only 13. Likewise, I had male friends who had full beards at 13 or 14. (Personally, I blame the growth hormones in mainstream meats/dairy).

                This is all a mind experiment from my pov anyway…I don’t think an adult man or woman (20 or older) should be with an adolescent boy or girl (16 or younger), regardless of how attractive he/she is to them. But finding a certain body type attractive isn’t a bad thing, so I certainly wouldn’t shame a 20 year old male or female for simply thinking a 13 year old boy or girl is attractive, so long as they don’t romantically pursue said child.

                • Subliminal Portal says:

                  Tarnished? You said in your post, “I don’t think an adult man or woman (20 or older) should be with an adolescent boy or girl (16 or younger), regardless of how attractive he/she is to them. But finding a certain body type attractive isn’t a bad thing, so I certainly wouldn’t shame a 20 year old male or female for simply thinking a 13 year old boy or girl is attractive, so long as they don’t romantically pursue said child.”

                  I say easier said than done. The heart does what it wants. One of our presidential candidates, Dr. Ben Carson, even revealed that his mother was 13 years old when she got married; and it came out further that his father was 28 years old when he married Dr. Ben Carson’s 13-year-old mother. Our nation (the United States of America) will never have a same-age-appropriate Utopia.

                  • Tarnished says:

                    True, but luckily there are laws in place to at least attempt to eliminate age-inappropriate child marriage.
                    A 17 year old marrying a 25 year old? Ok.
                    A 18 year old marrying a 28 year old? Sure thing.
                    A 13 year old marrying a 28 year old? Really not sure how that didn’t set off massive red flags and alarm bells. A 13 year old is not an adult, whether boy or girl, no matter how mature or intelligent. Their brains and bodies are nowhere close to being developed enough for making a family of their own, much less becoming a full fledged partner and lifemate in a legal commitment such as marriage.

                    It’s not the 15 year age difference that’s the problem…After all, my own FwB is 15 years older than I am. But we became friends when he was 34 and I was 19 (an adult, in college, living on my own for 2 years already, with a wealth of shared hobbies) and didn’t start anything else til I was 22. Point is, two adults, even with a larger than normal age gap, are on a much more even footing of similar experiences and interests than a man/woman who’s already gone through high school, college, has a career, etc and is dating a boy/girl who has only just begun growing into their body and creating their own personality.

                    Again though, that is why we have laws that would typically help prevent this from happening.

                  • Tarnished says:

                    Also, it would appear that some aspects of the story you speak of regarding Carson’s mother and father were exaggerated and/or altered, for whatever reason:

                    I find it much easier to believe that she married at age 16-17 than 13, as the documentation shows. A 17 year old with a 28 year old might not be commonplace nowadays, but times have changed since then and at least it is not a child marriage. Do I believe that he might’ve begun courting her when she was 13 and he was 24? It’s a possibility, sure.

                    • Subliminal Portal says:

                      Tarnished? That news article to which you provided me a link is indeed interesting. I’m still reading it. Between Ted Cruz, Hillary Clinton, and some of the other American presidential candidates, I’m beginning to have a difficult time knowing who is telling the truth and who is lying among them. It’s a shame that American politics have become so dirty. Nonetheless, I still do not subscribe to the one-size-fits-all formula on age-appropriate marriage. I can understand why people’s eyebrows raise whenever they hear a story about a man in his seventies marrying an 8-year-old girl over in Yemen or one of the other Islamic countries. Conventional wisdom dictates that a little girl who still has her baby teeth should not be marrying a man who is old enough for a prescription to Levitra, Cialas, or Viagra. And I do not approve of young girls being forced into polygamous marriages in these L.D.S. compounds out in Utah and throughout the Southwest, because a lot of these Latter Day Saints sects function like mobsters.
                      However, as I said previously, I do not believe that our country will ever become a same-age-appropriate Utopia and the quest for such is futile in any event.

                      I once came across an article online from 2003 in the Mobile Register about a 34-year-old Alabama woman who had been married to a 63-year-old man for 20 years by the time she had provided information to the reporter about her marriage and her life. I’ve gone back to read that same article several times. The online article was recently removed from the Internet. In any event, the young woman had four kids and did not provide her name therein, because she did not wish her kids to be harassed as it was obvious from the article that the woman was 14 years old and her husband was 43 years old when they got married back in 1983. They were happily married and had no regrets about their decisions. It’s like that French Canadian singer, Celine Dion, who was in middle school when she developed romantic feelings for then 38-year-old Rene Angelis. She eventually married him and had a marriage with him that was as solid as a rock. However, all the narrow-minded people here in the United States of America continued to snipe at them and accuse their relationship of being an abomination to all decency. My answer to these narrow-minded people’s logic is that I would have much rather had Celine Dion and Rene Angelis as my next-door neighbors than Jim Bob Duggar and Michelle Duggar of “19 Kids And Counting.” The mistake that Americans make is putting these self-righteous do-gooders like the Duggars high up on pedestals only to find out that they have multiple sordid family secrets hiding in their closet in the form of a Joshua Duggar. The best thing that the TLC cable network ever did was cancel “19 Kids And Counting” altogether. Many people were happy that they did, because a lot of people got sick and tired of seeing Jim Bob Duggar brag about how he was 15 years old and Michelle Duggar was 14 years old when they fell in love and how they married right out of high school. It was apparent that there was something off about Jim Bob Duggar when he constantly flashed a picture taken of him when he was 15 years old as though his whole life was predicated upon being a high school sweetheart, a glittering prom king and a young groom. These perfectionists people like the Duggars make me sick, and they always pass judgment on others.

                      The point I’m trying to make is that there is no reason for society to treat people like the above aforementioned Alabama woman and Celine Dion as outcasts, and I see way too much of that going on in our country. Also, I am aware of a lot of laws that have been placed on the books in recent years to make it more difficult for adolescents as young as 12 or 13 years old to get married to someone noticeably older than them. However, some of the people who have pushed these laws are not the brightest bulbs in the bunch. Take for example, Kathleen Sebelius. After then-22-year-old Matt Koso and then 14-year-old Crystal Guyer traveled to Kansas to get legally married after Crystal Guyer became pregnant with Matt Koso’s baby back in 2005, Kathleen Sebelius became all hellbent in her role as the governor of Kansas to raise the minimum marriageable age for minors to as close to 18 years old as she could in her state. She made ludicrous statements like she said that she thought that sexual predators misused the institution of marriage to cover up their crimes against kids. Her statement could not have been any more ignorant than it was, because real child rapists like Jesse Timmendequas and Joseph Duncan III would never marry their victims; and Matt Koso was not a child rapist. After President Obama appointed Kathleen Sebelius to the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services so many years later, she made Obamacare into a disaster and she left office and Washington in shame after numerous Congressmen and Congresswomen demanded her resignation. In a nutshell, people like Kathleen Sebelius just wish to screw up our country, if not turn it into a military police state. (By the way, I am not a Republican.)

                      An interesting group of people that I have come across are the Irish Travelers. The average lifespan of their men is 39 years old. Because their men die so young, it is customary in their culture to marry their wives as young as 12 years old so that they may breed enough children to keep themselves from going extinct. They have engaged in this practice for centuries, and nobody among their own circles have complained about it. A woman once asked me on YouTube that if they need for their girls to start having kids at a young age to prevent themselves from becoming extinct, then why don’t they just marry their 12-year-old girls off to boys in their early teens? I told her that the answer to her question was plain and simple. 13, 14, and 15-year-old boys are incapable of financially supporting a wife and kids. When Janet Reno was the United States Attorney General, she presented legal challenges against this marital practice of theirs back in the 1990s. However, she did not prevail against these people, and these people continue on with this same practice to this very day as it is their culture to do so. If it works for them, I have no problem with it; and as I said, I do not believe that there is a one-size-fits-all formula. If adult Irish Traveler women came forward and protested this practice, that would be a different story. However, they haven’t.

                    • Subliminal Portal says:

                      Tarnished? In case you wanted to read that online article I mentioned to you regarding the 34-year-old Alabama woman who married a significantly older man when she was just 14 years old back in 1983, I was able to find the link to a cached copy of it here on the Internet.>>>Click onto

                      By the way, in response to that online article to which you provided me a link regarding his father, Dr. Ben Carson continues to be quite insistent that press and the media has repeatedly lied about him. He seems like an honest man, but, then again, one cannot always tell how truthful some of the politicians are being.

                    • Tarnished says:

                      Thank you, SP. I still am of the opinion that the life experience gap is too great between the aforementioned ages, but I appreciate your finding this link. Cheers.

          • Subliminal Portal says:

            Norman? The young girl with blond hair in that picture you posted just happens to look exceptionally beautiful in that she has that Christie Brinkley gift. In other words, she will look as beautiful as she does now 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now, 40 years from now, . . . even when she is in her sixties. Some females are just like roses that stay in bloom all their life. Look at Lauren Bacall. Her feminine beauty never died out. She was 89 years old when she died, and she was beautiful even until then. Not the old and haggedy-looking like Betty White.

        • free speech says:

          That blog is not scientific. It is run by a woman hating pedophile Angelo Bonavera. He owns and makes up his own science as a defense mechanism against the fact he wants girls between 9-14 and that it is not healthy. I sure you are him bit just in case this is a warning.

          • Subliminal Portal says:

            Free speech? Shoot! You make this Angelo Bonavera dude sound like he’s the next Dr. Alfred Charles Kinsey.

          • Norman says:

            There is a lot of crap on his site but I think he’s got this right. The women who were rated the most attractive in the study were those who most closely resembled average 13 year olds. If the study included real 13 year olds there’s no reason to think that they wouldn’t have come top. This is more evidence that most men have an instinctive preference for pubescent girls just as biology predicts.

            • Subliminal Portal says:

              Norman? When my great aunt was alive, she used to tell me and my family members that when she was 16 years old, it was common for her and her female peers to flirt with men in their mid-twenties and for men that age even to court girls her age. She told me and my family members that once a girl started noticing the opposite sex back in those days, there was no stigma attached to her intermingling with a boy or man outside of her own age circles. How did American society get to be so Puritanical? And then despite how all these know-it-alls claim that adolescent girls 13 years old and older are so better off with boys their own age, YouTube is inundated with stories about girls that young whose same-age boyfriend got her pregnant and then bailed on her. I don’t see how American society can call that good.

  19. TwentyNine says:

    Read this to get a better idea of how mating would have worked in prehistoric times.

  20. Travis says:

    I see Tyrion. I think Women dating younger men is a recent phenomenon and it sucks since I’m 30 and can realistically date women between 25-35, the clock is definitely ticking for me!

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

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s