Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Relationships - Age limits
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,112 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59041
Online people are more likely to be honest, or more likely to be tut tutting curtain twitchers, or aggressive, or dismissive, or outraged[Delete as applicable] In the Real World™ people are much more likely to say nada or tut tut in private among the like minded. Nature of the beast T.Deleted User wrote: »Only so much as I was exampling how reactions I only see online are not something I extrapolate to meat space.
Real Life. Earlier.
On the firearms front: I once spent a fantastic day with me Da© on a firing range in the US when I was 12/13. Shooting all sorts of pistols, rifles, inc semi auto rifles. AK47's have a fair oul kick to them. AR15's not nearly so much. Pistols were very inaccurate in my hands. Except for one of the earliest automatic pistols made, a Mauser C96(the basis for Han Solo's gun in Star Wars). I got pretty good with that heavy old thing alright. Even locals were impressed. Some bang off it though. One of the loudest pistols there.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
That's part of it of course. Just like a woman going out with a wealthy man. Who's got a larger potential dating base? An office junior guy driving a cubicle at 25, or a 35 year old business guy with a couple of mill in the bank? On average people tend to pair off with "equals" in looks, status and age. Where they don't it tends to be richer, often older men with younger better looking partners.
I’d agree with all that for sure, and g&t was asking the question in terms of her friend that owns a dating agency, that many of the men were looking for a young woman as opposed to women their own age. In that context it’s very much a “buyers market” as it were, as those men would not only have the kind of money to be throwing at dating agencies, but they would also have the kind of wealth that would enable them to keep a young woman enthralled and entertained. There are services for women too, but they aren’t generally as popular. I just don’t know will there ever be a point where women who can afford to keep a young man enthralled and entertained will be regarded with the same level of social acceptance. Dating agencies for women who want some arm candy aren’t nearly so appealing an opportunity for young men who want to be enthralled and entertained and accustomed to an aspirational lifestyle Men of leisure are very few and far between as opposed to ladies of leisure who are still quite common and far more socially acceptable.Well yes and no and the two have large overlaps. The biological facts are women have a finite time to have kids that's physically bounded and that reproductive biology means a woman's fertility peaks in her early to mid twenties and slowly declines from there, though it's not nearly as rapid as some seem to think. EG it's not in free fall by 30 or anything like it. Even at 40 a woman's average chances of a birth are still running at around half of when she's 25. The risks of genetic damage and difficult pregnancies and births do increase after the early 30's. Getting pregnant after 35 is even referred to if unkindly as a "geriatric pregnancy".
Some studies concluded that both parents age was a factor in this, but when studies looked at older men/younger women pairings(and vice versa) the stats showed that it's the woman's age that is the biggest factor by far. Except for autism. Older men are more likely to sire autistic children. Not a big effect, but present. Men's fertility also declines but much more slowly. To the degree that sprem donor facilities in Europe and the UK upped their age limit to 50 for donors. Interestingly the health of a women's eggs didn't seem to be the issue, but the overall physical environment. IE a woman of 25 who received donated eggs from a woman of 40 will have nigh on the same risks and outcomes as another woman of 25 with her own eggs. Fascinating stuff. Though the obvious reason would be that pregnancy and birth are bloody hard on the body and a 25 year old will be on average more able to take such a toll.
Then again folks differ. One of my grandmothers had her last kid at 45 and she reckoned it was the easiest pregnancy and birth of the four she had. Folks differ in other ways. EG in my family and on both sides the widowers vastly outnumber the widows(only two widows in living memory). They tended to marry younger women too. Roughly between 8 and 20 years younger. In recent years two male rellies were the ones nursing and then mourning their wives. Not usual at all, as it's normally the other way around and age gaps certainly increase the risk, but you really don't know how things will turn out, even for folks the same age. I'm sure we all know as I do young enough equal aged couples where they ended up in that horrible position of looking after a failing partner.
Yep, there’s definitely more overlap than solely putting it down to evolution, particularly in the last century or so when women are in a far better place to be able to control their fertility than at any other time throughout human history, and by that I mean I remember reading about some of the earliest contraceptive methods, which I don’t imagine were particularly effective -
Birth control and abortion are well documented in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. (See History of abortion.) The Ebers Papyrus from 1550 BC and the Kahun Papyrus from 1850 BC have within them some of the earliest documented descriptions of birth control, the use of honey, acacia leaves and lint to be placed in the vagina to block sperm. Another early document explicitly referring to birth control methods is the Kahun Gynecological Papyrus from about 1850 BC. It describes various contraceptive pessaries, including acacia gum, which recent research has confirmed to have spermatocidal qualities and is still used in contraceptive jellies. Other birth control methods mentioned in the papyrus include the application of gummy substances to cover the "mouth of the womb" (i.e. the cervix), a mixture of honey and sodium carbonate applied to the inside of the vagina, and a pessary made from crocodile dung. Lactation (breast-feeding) of up to three years was also used for birth control purposes in ancient Egypt.
And today there are fertility clinics with special offers and a growing number of global companies offering all sorts of incentives for women to delay pregnancy and childbirth. To that end at least I think the whole issue of ‘biological clocks’ and so on are likely to become even less of a relevant factor that women will have to consider as it becomes more socially acceptable to control how, when and more importantly if they decide to have either their own biological children, or choose from a whole plethora of other options such as surrogacy. I think that for women getting pregnant after 35 will in about a decade or so be seen as much less an extraordinary feat of evolution and biology and much more simply another lifestyle choice based on women’s social expectations for themselves as they gain more social capital. I don’t think it will ever likely be on the same footing as men, but for that minority of women, they now have options that weren’t granted them by virtue of their biology. They have for all intents and purposes overcome the limitations of evolutionary biology and so there isn’t the same impetus on women to pair off to be provided for by men who once had greater opportunities to provide for them, as there once was, historically speaking.Yeah, but c'mon you're hardly competing like with like G. In extremis Brad Pitt even if he was an "ordinary bloke" when he was 40 odd was in the top percentile of male looks and would blow 90% of the 26 year old Jon's in the office(leaving out the aitch in "John" would be a hanging offence anyway). It's like saying yer wan from Modern Family Sofia Vergara is a good example of a 45 year old woman. Yes they're extremes, but you could go the other way and compare 26 year old Jon, gone fat around the middle since college nursing a future of crap health(and who could well be balding too) and a 40 year old cross fitter who is all sinew and energy. May even have a full head of hair with it.
Though I would say that men age faster on average in one way and that's mentally. IMHO and IME men are far more likely to settle on a way of thinking and doing and ride that to the grave. They get into a mental rut. Much more than women in my experience. Plus they rarely get a second wind the way many women do after menopause. Given the choice between hanging out with a random average bunch of middle aged strangers for an afternoon, give me a bunch of women any day of the week.
Have to admit I’d be the very same, and that’s why even when g&t asked what is it with men’s obsession with younger women, I wasn’t going to be the pedantic fcuker that points out that it’s really a vanishingly small minority of middle aged men would be at all interested in women young enough to be their daughters. That’s why the minority of men who are though, are going to be so much more obvious as to jar in ones memory! Speaking of jarring memories, while I often enjoy the company of elderly women, I’ve met a few who weren’t just experiencing a second wind after menopause, but the menopause gave them the opportunity to seek out new relationships* after either divorce or their hubby had previously shuffled off this mortal coil and their children had grown up and left the nest. Some of their accounts of their exploits would embarrass any 17 year old girl who thought she was worldly wise at her age :pac:
*There’s a downside to that too of course in that the rate of STI’s amongst OAPs is rising at an even faster rate than among younger generations.0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,112 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59041
Leslie was a fcuking great comedic actor. It's the treating it seriously straight face that gets me. Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,112 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59041
Monocular Jack, I was solely referring to conversation within the middle aged milieu.One eyed Jack wrote: »Have to admit I’d be the very same, and that’s why even when g&t asked what is it with men’s obsession with younger women, I wasn’t going to be the pedantic fcuker that points out that it’s really a vanishingly small minority of middle aged men would be at all interested in women young enough to be their daughters. While no way at 50 would I be interested in a woman in her twenties, or it would be a major WTF going on(and wouldn't happen), TBH on a purely physical desire front(and averaging it out of course), outa the gate, I'd be more interested and attracted to a woman in her mid 30's than one in her 50's.
Oh and the ancients go to method was primarily the oul pull out before you shoot. Which if done correctly is not far off perfect use condoms. Done correctly.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
clog up the thread with the experiences of one person and some very, very, wordy posts.
A petty and uncalled for parting shot really - but unfortunately we are getting nothing much more than personal experiences on this thread. And the personal experiences are positive. Mine and two others for example.
A couple of others are offering us _not even_ personal experiences against the notion however. Just vague gut assertions that something is being "denied" or it is all a bad thing because it just is. None of which you appear willing to even attempt to support or back up.
Personal experience should be taken like all anecdote. It is far from the ideal. But it is certainly better than the literal nothing that is being held up against it so far here.paleoperson wrote: »Reckless endangerment including of a minor.
By your own definition of both "minor" and "endangerment" it seems. Not one that is actually included in any law I have seen. 17 being for example the age of consent.
But who exactly is endangering anyone and how?paleoperson wrote: »To me it isn't credible that a person of sound mind wouldn't understand the risks of putting firearms in the hands of a child.
Who says someone does not understand the risks of it?
I taught my daughter how to make pancakes at age 5 and change the wiring of a plug at age 6. I did those too perfectly cognizant of the risks involved.
One can perfectly easily teach a child a skill without losing sight of the risks inherent in the process of education and use. In fact the exact opposite is the point. One can pick things to teach them and train them in precisely _because_ you know the dangers of that something and yuo wish to teach them the care and respect required around that something.
In other words it is not a failure to understand the risks that motivates my training. It is precisely _because_ of the risks I do so.paleoperson wrote: »I'm sure you'll also act like a loon when boyfriends start coming on the scene if she survives until then, no fear of that.
I certainty see no reason to expect will be born out in reality. Nor do I see a single reason to expect it to happen. Nor do the vast majority of fathers in my experience act that way. Boyfriends are a fact of life - and my job as a parent is not to go looney when they come. My job as a parent is to develop _now_ and until then a girl and woman that I trust to handle it mostly herself when the time comes. The thankfully small minority of dads who go ineffectually loopy when the first male shows up in their daughters life are likely doing more harm than good.Online people are more likely to be honest, or more likely to be tut tutting curtain twitchers, or aggressive, or dismissive, or outraged
Yes that is what I mean. But I wonder if it is that online people are more likely to be that way - or the people who are more likely to be that way are more likely to go online to do it. It becomes one of those "self selecting data sets" in that case.
What I mean is that despite being told above that "most people" will not agree with my positions I see very few people on or off line who have an issue with it. It is just by far the vast majority _of_ the vast minority who seem to - go online to express it.
The main point being that I am not seeing many at all - let alone "most people" with an issue on subjects like age differences or gun training and the like.On the firearms front: I once spent a fantastic day with me Da© on a firing range in the US when I was 12/13. Shooting all sorts of pistols, rifles, inc semi auto rifles. AK47's have a fair oul kick to them.
Yeah as a parent I often feel that if there are things that are dangerous and risky in life that a child might do - or even do often - that it is best they first do it with me where sane. So that the child learns the basics and learns their own boundaries and limits. So that someone experienced can not exploit their ignorance later. Basic training with - and respect for - things like fire arms is one example of this.
A training and respect I even then carry across to things like our air gun at home. After they fire it at something and they run to that something - I have drummed it into them they are not even allowed _move_ until they have checked the weapon - disarmed or put it on safety - and checked the chamber. It does not matter how dangerous or benign the "weapon" is - I drum the exact same respect into them. And it is funny to see the training take hold as a near instinct. My 4 year old son will not even put his NERF gun down without ensuring it is not loaded and able to fire accidentally now.
Alcohol and maybe weed is another example. I intend to be the first person - and hopefully second and third - to get my kids stoned or drunk later in life. Because I envision with a kind of horror a girl learning her limits and boundaries with alcohol among horny boys who will happily ply her with more than her capabilities on her first experiences knowing A) She wont know when to stop and
this will leave her - pliable shall we say. I know she will go off drinking like most teens do at some point. And I want to know that when she does so she will know her limits and respect the effects.
The more the kids experience with me and learn the boundaries of - the less their ignorance of those limits can surprise them and be used against them. And I try to take that approach into the skills - education - and knowledge I bring to them.
Then when a girl hits 17 - my plan is not to be there protecting her from every 27 year old on the planet. But to feel as confident as I can that if such an individual approaches her - that all the protection I can offer her is installed in her - not in me.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcOUO9WNDUI
Advertisement