Irish Times article, 38 year-old woman claims not to understand why some younger men

erudec

It's in Saturday 5th May, Lifestyle section. Roe McDermott's agony aunt column.

The poor love calls it "weird" that she's caught the eye of a few men who were toddlers when she was doing her Leaving Cert.

Are many of my fellow ladies really in the dark about this?

Here's the thing: if you're not obese, don't have prominent facial hair and are under 45, chances are that some lads in their twenties "wouldn't kick us out of the scratcher for eating crisps" as my friends and I used to say in college when we were taking a break from being ladylike.

I'm not making a sexist "all men are beasts" argument, but it's probably natural enough that while a woman is fertile, there are some younger men around who will find you attractive.

The biology is what drives it, probably. Go back to prehistoric times. Sometimes, because of disease or natural disasters, the only people left in a tribe would be some infertile people, some young men and one middle-aged but still fertile woman.

For a tribe in this position, if none of the young men feel enough attraction to the woman to conceive with her, the tribe might die out.

We are descendants of a people whose males didn't all lose their attraction to women until they were totally infertile.

I don't have a wandering eye. But I don't hate it when I catch a young fella's eyes lingering on me slightly.

Obviously, when a young one admires my other half and he scrubbed up, that is a crime against humanity and she needs to be hanged from the highest tree! (JK!)

Carlos Orange

I would have thought the obvious answer to her question was there are way more single guys in their 20s than late 30s.

Fann Linn

Crazy title.

saccades

Apologies, just read the charter, arrived here from the jump page.

meeeeh

Heavy stuff op...

erudec

Fann Linn wrote: »

Crazy title.

New phone. Didn't realise I was cutting off the title. Sure I posted it twice and couldn't delete it.

Yes, I am a rank amateur!

erudec

meeeeh wrote: »

Heavy stuff op...

What's so heavy?

meeeeh

erudec wrote: »

What's so heavy?

It's very anthropological take on one letter to self help section of newspaper. It's also just as likely there are twenty something men who want to tick off a certain type on the list of women to sleep with. A bit less complex than survival of the species.

erudec

meeeeh wrote: »

It's very anthropological take on one letter to self help section of newspaper. It's also just as likely there are twenty something men who want to tick off a certain type on the list of women to sleep with.

Well, I am very anthropological, so that explains it.

Sile Na Gig

I read this in the paper with some amusement. Fair play to her. I’m pretty much invisible to men and I’m good with that.

The evolutionary angle is interesting but I don’t think that it’s a cover all. I’d say the young fellas she’s matching with are casting a wide net, there’s still some glamour attached to an older woman/Mrs Robinson type. Maybe the older lads are looking for someone younger to make themselves feel young (you’re as young as the person you’re feeling...boom boom)? I’d be interested to know whether the young fellas are wanting a relationship or just sex. I can’t imagine having a relationship with someone in their 20’s. I know a few lads this age through work, they’re lovely lads but on a completely different wavelength. I’d see them as more like my kids than my husband.

skallywag

I think that you are heavily over-thinking this one OP.

An attractive woman in her 30s or 40s (and even beyond) is naturally going to catch the eye of men of all ages, also those in their 20s.

Vica versa an attractive man of that age will also attract eye from some women in their 20s.

The difference lies in finding someone physical attractive / having a fling etc, to actually wanting something more mid to long term.

I agree with you that biology is the driver, but in a more general way.

erudec

skallywag wrote: »

I think that you are heavily over-thinking this one OP.

An attractive woman in her 30s or 40s (and even beyond) is naturally going to catch the eye of men of all ages, also those in their 20s.

Vica versa an attractive man of that age will also attract eye from some women in their 20s.

The difference lies in finding someone physical attractive / having a fling etc, to actually wanting something more mid to long term.

I agree with you that biology is the driver, but in a more general way.

I'm really just surprised that we're in the 21st century and there's still people who have been married but are still so innocent as the woman writing to Roe.

jk23

As a 30 year old male I don’t know if I am young enough to have an opinion on this!

but I think women in Ireland especially in their 30s and 40s and even in to their 50s are looking much better and keeping themselves in shape much better than ever before.

I have definitely noticed some very attractive ladies that would be at least 10 years older if not more than me.

Dial Hard

erudec wrote:

I'm really just surprised that we're in the 21st century and there's still people who have been married but are still so innocent as the woman writing to Roe.

I'm convinced that most of the letters published in Irish newspaper advice columns are dreamed up by subs during their Friday afternoon liquid lunch.

matrim

A quick Google for "most beautiful woman 2017" shows that the top 10 were all at 32+.

jk23

matrim wrote: »

A quick Google for "most beautiful woman 2017" shows that the top 10 were all at 32+.

To second this all the best looking women on Irish tv are 35+
e.g Claire Byrne, Grainne Seoighe, Ciara Doherty(tv3) and Sharon ni Beolain

A Pint of Goo

I don't understand why women don't take advantage of this, think of all the fit young studs you could have!

Are you just not attracted to younger guys or you worried that your friends will judge you?

meeeeh

A Pint of Goo wrote: »

I don't understand why women don't take advantage of this, think of all the fit young studs you could have!

Are you just not attracted to younger guys or you worried that your friends will judge you?

Because some possibly want more than just a notch on a bed post. I'm sure It's easy to find someone in their 20s to sleep with. It's a bit harder to find someone who will pay child support (If you want a family).

skallywag

Dial Hard wrote: »

I'm convinced that most of the letters published in Irish newspaper advice columns are dreamed up by subs during their Friday afternoon liquid lunch.

+1 to that, I've regularly had the feeling that such columns are totally contrived.

I'm pretty sure that if someone had a genuine issue then the likes of a reputable forum such as Boards would be a far more appropriate arena to air it in

TheValeyard

So,



Who's getting the ride?

erudec

matrim wrote: »

A quick Google for "most beautiful woman 2017" shows that the top 10 were all at 32+.

Yeah, I like looking at beautiful women, but let's be quite honest here: the ones who make me gasp in admiration are usually under 25.

Women's magazines tend to be dominated by pictures of such women, so I don't think I'm really alone here.

erudec

A Pint of Goo wrote: »

I don't understand why women don't take advantage of this, think of all the fit young studs you could have!

Are you just not attracted to younger guys or you worried that your friends will judge you?

Just because we like the look of someone, it doesn't mean that we'd enjoy an affair with him.

It takes time for me to be comfortable in bed with someone new. Or at least, it did when I was single. So one-night stands just aren't fun for the likes of me.

That's true for all fellas. So then you consider someone a lot younger. You second-guess yourself a lot if you are anything like me? "Is he going to call me after, or am I just a notch on the bedpost?" is the kind of thing I'd probably say to myself.

"How many other ladies of a certain age does he approach? Does he really like me or am I just fuel for some kinky stuff in his head?"

None of this matters compared to the worst, most horrible thought of all:

"Do I remind him of his mammy?"

And then I'd run screaming for the hills.

So, that's my reason why, if I became single, a toy boy would be out of the question for me. Unless it was a pretty short age gap.

Snickers Man

erudec wrote: »

Well, I am very anthropological, so that explains it.

Anthropological me arse!! It's probably down to the ubiquitous and free availability of MILF porn!

We men ARE beasts. Sorry

erudec

Snickers Man wrote: »

Anthropological me arse!! It's probably down to the ubiquitous and free availability of MILF porn!

We men ARE beasts. Sorry

That doesn't clarify much, though.

Just because a thing is available, it doesn't mean that it's going to be popular or very profitable to make.

So sure, there's "exotic films" of young bucks with older women than the norm. That still doesn't explain why it's so profitable to make these films that it's become ubiquitous.

I would never watch a movie with a middle-aged man with an 18 year-old, at least not if he had the usual saggy bits that such men tend to have, and I think probably most women wouldn't. But reverse the gender and those films are very popular.

skallywag

erudec wrote: »

But reverse the gender and those films are very popular.

Are they really? i.e. pron videos with young men and saggy middle aged women? I would not have though so ...

erudec

skallywag wrote: »

Are they really? i.e. pron videos with young men and saggy middle aged women? I would not have though so ...

The word "granny" is a porn genre. I will say no more.

Edit: Actually, I better say more. Anyone who gets traumatised because they couldn't contain their curiosity shouldn't come crying to me.

seamus

A Pint of Goo wrote: »

I don't understand why women don't take advantage of this, think of all the fit young studs you could have!

Are you just not attracted to younger guys or you worried that your friends will judge you?

Those that want to, do.

But it just so happens that the majority of women 35+ are either in a long-term relationship, or looking for one.

The latter group have probably had their fill of short flings with eejits and would rather someone who would like to spend half of their time doing fun stuff at the weekends, rather than just popping in for a quick shag before going on their way.

Age difference is also important. As a man there are plenty of 20ish ladies who are very attractive, but I'd be 100% certain that they and their friends would annoy the absolute sh1t out of me. Even if I was single, I would be tentative about going out for dinner with a girl in her early 20s, pretty sure that we'd have little to discuss. Same as I'd have little interest in going for a pint with a bunch of college men.

So the answer to "why isn't every single woman over 35, a cougar", "why isn't every single male over 35, a sugar daddy", is probably the simple fact that most people are more interested in having someone whose company they can enjoy rather than just a piece of eye candy.

erudec

seamus wrote: »

Those that want to, do.

But it just so happens that the majority of women 35+ are either in a long-term relationship, or looking for one.

The latter group have probably had their fill of short flings with eejits and would rather someone who would like to spend half of their time doing fun stuff at the weekends, rather than just popping in for a quick shag before going on their way.

Age difference is also important. As a man there are plenty of 20ish ladies who are very attractive, but I'd be 100% certain that they and their friends would annoy the absolute sh1t out of me. Even if I was single, I would be tentative about going out for dinner with a girl in her early 20s, pretty sure that we'd have little to discuss. Same as I'd have little interest in going for a pint with a bunch of college men.

So the answer to "why isn't every single woman over 35, a cougar", "why isn't every single male over 35, a sugar daddy", is probably the simple fact that most people are more interested in having someone whose company they can enjoy rather than just a piece of eye candy.

Well surely only a small fraction of the male population have the money to be a sugar daddy. I have explained why I'll never be a cougar, but I don't want to speak for anyone else.

seamus

erudec wrote: »

Well surely only a small fraction of the male population have the money to be a sugar daddy. I have explained why I'll never be a cougar, but I don't want to speak for anyone else.

I expect the majority of single men over 35 probably have enough disposable income to appear to be very wealthy by the standards of a college student

erudec

seamus wrote: »

I expect the majority of single men over 35 probably have enough disposable income to appear to be very wealthy by the standards of a college student

I imagine if you are bright enough to get into college and brazen enough to engage in prostitution (let's be honest, lads), you're going to do some shopping around until you find the right sugar daddy.

You'll find some socially awkward geek who's a high level tech whatever on mad money in Google or such like and make sure he keeps your credit card nicely stacked so that you can get used to snorting lots of cocaine in the toilets of Brown Thomas, and walk out every time laden with bags.

More power to them, but I couldn't do it in a million years, even if I had the hotness for it.

meeeeh

erudec wrote: »

More power to them, but I couldn't do it in a million years, even if I had the hotness for it.

Your post comes accross as very judgemental and bitter. Not every woman who dates older man is a hooker.

Wanderer78

erudec wrote:

You'll find some socially awkward geek who's a high level tech whatever on mad money in Google or such like and make sure he keeps your credit card nicely stacked so that you can get used to snorting lots of cocaine in the toilets of Brown Thomas, and walk out every time laden with bags.

You ll actually find in some of those cases, that some of those 'geeks' are in fact autistic, it's very sad really, as many autistic people struggle to create and maintain meaningful, respectful relationships, including myself, as I'm autistic myself, leading some into these type of destructive and disrespectful relationships.

seamus

erudec wrote: »

I imagine if you are bright enough to get into college and brazen enough to engage in prostitution (let's be honest, lads), you're going to do some shopping around until you find the right sugar daddy.

I'm not sure if you've ever been in college, but most students have pretty frugal lifestyles.

And by frugal I mean stealing toilet paper from public toilets rather than buying it in a supermarket, and buying a roll from Centra and splitting it between 3 of them.

A guy who has his own place, his own car, and can afford to buy dinner at a place that's not Captain America's, is loaded from a college student's perspective.

erudec

meeeeh wrote: »

Your post comes accross as very judgemental and bitter. Not every woman who dates older man is a hooker.

I'm talking about women looking for sugar daddies, which unless you are living in the Jazz age, is a form of prostitution where pretty young women go onto websites like Seeking arrangement and list extremely specifically how much money their clients (which they call sugar daddies) will have to provide weekly to ensure the pretence of being his girlfriend will continue.

If a woman dates a much older man without specifying sums of money beforehand, or asking how much money he has in any way, I will give her the benefit of the doubt.

Give me some bloody credit!

erudec

seamus wrote: »

I'm not sure if you've ever been in college, but most students have pretty frugal lifestyles.

And by frugal I mean stealing toilet paper from public toilets rather than buying it in a supermarket, and buying a roll from Centra and splitting it between 3 of them.

A guy who has his own place, his own car, and can afford to buy dinner at a place that's not Captain America's, is loaded from a college student's perspective.

Yes, you're right, I have never even been to a school and I was raised by bears.

Where did you get the notion that I thought college students as a whole were not frugal?

Did you miss the part where we mentioned we are talking about the extremely tiny minority of college students who have sex with men they're not attracted to for money?

meeeeh

I might be wrong but I don't think Seamus was talking about prostitution (or paying for escorts) but about older men dating younger women in general.

erudec

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You ll actually find in some of those cases, that some of those 'geeks' are in fact autistic, it's very sad really, as many autistic people struggle to create and maintain meaningful, respectful relationships, including myself, as I'm autistic myself, leading some into these type of destructive and disrespectful relationships.

Yes, certainly people on the spectrum are overrepresented in computing, and it's exploiting a human need. Somehow people see the mentally impaired person in this situation as the villain, and the person manipulating the impaired person to extract money from him as the victim.

Life is strange.

erudec

meeeeh wrote: »

I might be wrong but I don't think Seamus was talking about prostitution (or paying for escorts) but about older men dating younger women in general.

Well I very obviously was talking about prostitutes and nobody else. So what the hell was he on about going after me?

seamus

erudec wrote: »

Did you miss the part where we mentioned we are talking about the extremely tiny minority of college students who have sex with men they're not attracted to for money?

Yes, perhaps because we never did?

"Sugar Daddy" is not generally considered to be a prostitution arrangement or explicitly "I give you money and you have sex with me".

Both parties are attracted to the relationship, just not necessarily to the physical aspects of it.

A college student going out with a 35 year old and enjoying the fact that he has plenty of money to spend on her, isn't necessarily a prostitute or an escort.

I don't know how you jumped from discussing dating outside your age range to people using escort websites.

Your overall tone is very defensive. Nobody's attacking you here, just trying to have a discussion.

meeeeh

erudec wrote: »

Well I very obviously was talking about prostitutes and nobody else. So what the hell was he on about going after me?

Because you responded to his/hers post which was pretty obviously not about prostitution. Nobody else but you was mentioning prostitution. There is no point getting uppity because you misread the post and replied to it.

Not to mention you make sweeping generalizations about geeks, tech employees, people on autistic spectrum etc. Is there an actual research that they are over represented paying for sex or is that just something that 'everybody knows'.

erudec

seamus wrote: »

Yes, perhaps because we never did?

"Sugar Daddy" is not generally considered to be a prostitution arrangement or explicitly "I give you money and you have sex with me".

Both parties are attracted to the relationship, just not necessarily to the physical aspects of it.

A college student going out with a 35 year old and enjoying the fact that he has plenty of money to spend on her, isn't necessarily a prostitute or an escort.

I don't know how you jumped from discussing dating outside your age range to people using escort websites.

Your overall tone is very defensive. Nobody's attacking you here, just trying to have a discussion.

Yeah, I have actually interacted with those women on Twitter and they're perfectly up front with you about what's what. I asked them if they would continue seeing their "daddy" if he declared bankruptcy and their answer was the "laughing hard" emoji.

You're what the block button was invented for, I'm afraid. So where is the bloody thing?

erudec

seamus wrote: »

Yes, perhaps because we never did?

"Sugar Daddy" is not generally considered to be a prostitution arrangement or explicitly "I give you money and you have sex with me".

Both parties are attracted to the relationship, just not necessarily to the physical aspects of it.

A college student going out with a 35 year old and enjoying the fact that he has plenty of money to spend on her, isn't necessarily a prostitute or an escort.

I don't know how you jumped from discussing dating outside your age range to people using escort websites.

Your overall tone is very defensive. Nobody's attacking you here, just trying to have a discussion.

If the relationship continues after all his money is spent, not a prostitute.

If it doesn't, prostitute.

Would someone mind telling me how to block this person, or do I have to pay money to boards.ie to get that privilege? Because price is no object.

My tone is very annoyed because of your behavior. I don't want to interact with you so I am asking you very, very clearly to stop responding to anything I say on any topic anywhere on this site.

I will not read, nor respond to anything further you wish to say.

kunst nugget

Is erudec not just that dude that keeps getting banned for his 'anthropological' tirades on women being whores and marriage being a sham where women are constantly cheating and most men are raising children that aren't theirs, pretending to be a woman?

Rachel weisz is having her first baby at 48.

erudec

kunst nugget wrote: »

Is erudec not just that dude that keeps getting banned for his 'anthropological' tirades on women being whores and marriage being a sham where women are constantly cheating and most men are raising children that aren't theirs, pretending to be a woman?

Apart from all of his views and being a man, that sounds exactly like me! Are you using your psychic powers for good?

skallywag

erudec wrote: »

So what the hell was he on about going after me?

He's not going after you at all, he's only contributing to a debate which you have opened up yourself, albeit that the original topic which you wrote about has now actually turned on it's head.

I don't know what's after provoking you but the manner in which you are reacting has certainly put me off adding any additional responses to this thread.

erudec

skallywag wrote: »

He's not going after you at all, he's only contributing to a debate which you have opened up yourself, albeit that the original topic which you wrote about has now actually turned on it's head.

I don't know what's after provoking you but the manner in which you are reacting has certainly put me off any adding any additional responses to this thread.

Here's the issue: we disagree on what the American slang phrase "sugar daddy" means.

Can you agree with that much? He thinks it means any younger woman dating any older man, I disagree and say that the people who usually use that phrase nowadays, mean a sex-for-money relationship.

Do you disagree that that is the nub of our disagreement?

I'm not American, and I am not an expert on linguistics, so I admit that I could be wrong. But I would have to see very good evidence from a linguistics expert before I admit I am wrong.

I took the time to interact with women online who call the men they have sex with in exchange for money sugar daddies, so from that I formed the opinion that a sugar daddy is a man paying for sex.

Am I being fair so far?