‘Why Do Younger Men Shorten Women’s Lifespans?’

Posted on | January 31, 2012 | 23 Comments

by Smitty

Roxanne de Luca poses the subject question. First off, I think that the Progressive notion that women=men is as much garbage as global warming. Neither gender is superior, in my estimation. I will note in Genesis 3, when the politics hit the fan, that a man is more immediately culpable.

Cutting right to the chase, are the traditional sociological arguments for gender roles really all that moot in our Postmodern age? Are men still in some sort of leadership role, where age, experience and financial resources buy nubile young brides in a cozy arrangement designed to propagate the species?

Roxanne’s link points to a study claiming to show that cougars, or “Demi Moore arrangements”, lead to shorter lifespans for women. But how common is the cougar case, really? And does the cougar case point to enough other hard-living factors to be more incidental to these women’s lives than causal?

I’m landing somewhere around the opinion that the toy boy is peripheral to the broader philosophical question: is decadence sustainable?

Category: Culture

Comments

23 Responses to “‘Why Do Younger Men Shorten Women’s Lifespans?’”

dustbury.com » Neither May nor December
January 31st, 2012 @ 4:51 pm

[…] to make sure that Roxeanne de Luca — or, for that matter, Smitty — doesn’t see […]
Datechguy
January 31st, 2012 @ 5:36 pm

Remember Ben Franklin always advised sleeping with older women, he said they were much more discreet and even more grateful.
serfer62
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:00 pm

The Boy Toy is the Third marriage as marriage was outlined in the Feminist Storm Troopers manual of 1970 published in both Time & Newsweek that summer. It used a different title.
The first was The Practise Husband, the secound was a nebulous name meaning Gold Mind. The Third, the Boy Toy was named The Fantasy Marriage & discribed as marriage to a much younger man.
As a Practise Husband astonded at the contempt for men I eventually remained single and thank God for the divorce.
I did learn 1) 2 could live as cheaply as 5 or 6. 2) To cook if I wanted to eat and am now quite good at it. 3) that the toilet seat goes up & down.
Marriage is a gift from God abused by females inbued with contempt.
Bob Belvedere
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:18 pm

An old randy fellow I worked with who always went with ladies at least twenty years younger than himself advised me that, until I was ready to settle down, it was best to date women over forty because, as he put it: ‘They don’t yell; they don’t swell; and they’re grateful as Hell’.
Bob Belvedere
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:21 pm

As an interesting fellow [I] once wrote:
Debauchery is something that should only be practiced by those who understand the limits to which it can be taken, who appreciate it is not the grant of full license. Anything straying beyond these limits is depravity and this can lead to madness. The practitioner must also realize, both by instinct and by reasoning, that debauchery must be kept in the shadows, kept away from those, the vast majority, who lack the necessary and proper understandings, least these souls be tempted beyond their limits. For if they are, they will pass directly into depravity.
Bob Belvedere
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:23 pm

There are many more such pearls of wisdom by myself and others to be found here:
http://thecampofthesaints.org/live-free-or-die/

Enjoy…in moderation.
Adjoran
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:41 pm

There is no need to turn this into an anti-Newt post.
Adjoran
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:45 pm

It’s really quite simple: those married to older men have resolved to take their revenge by outliving them.
Bob Belvedere
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:45 pm

Good one, but one must remember that Newton Leroy casts a very big shadow of his own.
serfer62
January 31st, 2012 @ 7:57 pm

and to spemd their money too
darleenclick
January 31st, 2012 @ 8:51 pm

Hmmm… I’m 7.5 years older than my husband. I’ll get back to you about who outlives whom.
darleenclick
January 31st, 2012 @ 8:51 pm

Hmmm… I’m 7.5 years older than my husband. I’ll get back to you about who outlives whom.
darleenclick
January 31st, 2012 @ 8:52 pm

whoa. Sorry about the double post.
Zilla of the Resistance
January 31st, 2012 @ 8:58 pm

Ever hear of the “Merry Widow”? Younger men don’t generally give wives that widowhood, which, while she misses her husband, she also finds that she has new freedom to explore things she may not have had a chance to enjoy
while caring for an aging husband and her children when they were
growing up. Just a thought. My dad died 11 years ago, and my mom misses him every day (as we all do), but he was sick the last few years and my mom and I were his primary caretakers, after a few years of grieving, my mom now seems to have had the world open up for her some, she is doing stuff, like travel, that she really didn’t get to do much of when my dad was still here, she also lost weight because she doesn’t have to cook to suit Dad’s tastes any more.
Younger guys generally require a lot of attention too, it is possible that these older women are simply being worn out or letting heartbreak from disloyal lovers wreck up their health.
Adjoran
January 31st, 2012 @ 9:14 pm

Well, keep him away from groundhogs the next few days . . .
Adjoran
January 31st, 2012 @ 9:14 pm

Which one was the double?
Pathfinder's wife
February 1st, 2012 @ 12:27 am

Hmm, I’m married to a younger man (by 3 months; he reminds me of this on occasion — that I “cougared” him into being my “trophy husband”). Should I be worried about kicking the bucket?
More to the point: might I need to complain to the trophy company? (just kidding, my man is the only one for me — always was, always will be; Mom always said in matters of husbands, choose a side, choose it well, and stick…unless he winds up hurting the kids or chasing tail, then you need to kill him).

As for Ms. Moore: well sister, this is what you get for marrying that cute young dingbat. If you were younger I’d say better luck, try again, maybe look well around before you leap; since you’re not, it’s time to hang it up before you wind up pulling a Liz Taylor which doesn’t obviously end all that well.
Elias Schewel
February 1st, 2012 @ 2:35 am

did that make sense to anyone else here?
Bob Belvedere
February 1st, 2012 @ 7:43 am

Mrs. B. is three years older than I and I must admit I did enjoy saying to her on the day before her 50th birthday three years ago: ‘What’s gonna happen to you tomorrow that won’t happen to me?’
Anamika
February 1st, 2012 @ 9:47 am

Sexual aggression by women — even young girls seems to suggest that the culture is definitely changing.

Yes and no. In some ways this is a reaction against old ways, but
without necessarily understanding what was wrong with them. Repression /
licence / repression / licence, there are cycles.

I think many women follow “current fashion” and “popular trend” without
considering the consequences of their actions — sexual, economic,
psychological.

There appears to be a considerable amount of lack of self-awareness.
What appears to drive young women most is the need to be wanted,
accepted, and loved; and that lacking any genuine insight into
themselves, they do what is easiest: use their ‘honey’ to attract bees.

Of course, in developing nations and among the poorest, the need appears to be mostly economic. You ‘sell’ what you got.

To me, Hillary Clinton’s opinion that the answer to women’s
empowerment is the empowerment of all seems right on. Not just in
economical empowerment, but psychological empowerment…even sexual empowerment.
Anamika
February 1st, 2012 @ 9:57 am

And can we talk about women’s clothing, please? We live in a culture where it is common place for girls and women (aged 15-65) to expose at least 1/2 their cleavage, and to wear clothes so tight that you can see every curve, mole and wrinkle.

(Please don’t respond with: don’t blame the girls for rape. I’m not doing that.)

I’m suggesting that the culture in the West is to USE sexuality like a billboard advertising ‘the goods’.

And, from what I’ve observed, the more the woman exposes and promotes, the more she tends to be truly ‘inviting’.

Now, she may be wanting to invite only ‘this’ much attention, and sometimes get more than was intended. But from what I’ve seen lately, those that do that kind of promotion, genuinely WANT that kind of attention.

More and more young women are inviting casual sex. In many circles (not all of course) sex has become just another form of recreation.

Again, please don’t take this as anything more than it is — addressing one aspect of sexual objectification: which is the increasing tendency for young women to objectify men.

Or this could be seen as their tendency to objectify themselves. But at least their freedom to experiment is there. Heck, we even have a new (20 year old) term for the older women who like their ‘men candy’: cougars. And i’ll buy the cougar example, this looks like a more or less conscious attempt to get what they want, knowing that the market favours them, and having enough experience to know a good many of the currents.

Why this is happening more and more, I can’t say.

With the young girls experimenting, perhaps some more permanent change can happen. It looks too early to say just yet. Liberal periods have come before but didn’t last.
Blake
February 1st, 2012 @ 10:54 am

I’m starting to wonder if middle aged conservative males are starting to trend toward older women because so many 40+ year old women don’t act their age.

I know I started dating an older women for that reason. Married her, too. Definitely the best decision I’ve made in a long time
Dave
February 1st, 2012 @ 12:51 pm

Well, with that attitude, the answer COULD be “I’m going to get laid”. Be careful. 😀