The author of the piece of garbage in question is...well, NOTHING, basically. He's a mangina through and through. A male feminist. Basically, he's a traitor. But the article was shared for ripping apart at my favorite forum, and I took part in said ripping. I'm not going to post the entire article here, just a bunch of quotes and the web address for this particular piece of trash from the scumpouch Hugo.
A warning to the TL;DR crowd: this post is going to be long. Very, very long.
"If there's one tangible thing that men can do to help end sexism—and create a healthier culture in which young people come of age—it's to stop chasing after women young enough to be their biological daughters. As hyperbolic as it may sound, there are few more powerful actions that men can take to transform the culture than to date, mate, and stay with their approximate chronological peers. If aging guys would commit to doing this, everyone would benefit: older men and younger men, older women and younger women."
I fail to see a) how dating someone younger is sexism, b) why on Earth it is the responsibility of men to end sexism, c) why men would even WANT to, and d) how your proposed 'solution' is even relevant to the issue (whatever that may be).
Let's look at a) through d) point-by-point.
A) People dating and/or marrying whosoever they choose is only sexism if one goes by the definition put forth by feminists/liberals/other assorted Marxists. Which, conveniently, amounts to 'anything that any woman, anywhere, can get offended about'. Since people dating whoever they want to, rather than who someone else thinks they should, is a great example of the free market at work, I can see why Marxists would be against it. After all, free markets encourage competition. People will better themselves to attract a mate that meets their expectations for attractiveness, personality, etc. And men in their 30s, 40s, or beyond are free to choose women in their 20s. Marxists absolutely HATE anyone being able to make their own choices, rather than the Marxists making choices for them.
B) It's sexism when some woman, somewhere gets offended, chivalry when a woman likes it; dominance when a man takes charge and she likes it, sexism when she doesn't. It can be the same action each time. Let's say I hold a door open for a woman who's juggling three bags of groceries and a screaming toddler. Some women will be grateful, others indignant. Same action, different results. The problem most assuredly is NOT on MY end, but rather that of the female. It's not MY responsibility to adjust my actions to her mood; rather, it is HER responsibility to see my actions for what they are, a polite gesture.
C) Tell me again why I, or any other man, should care? A war has been waged against us for decades, destroying everything that is us. Masculinity is shamed, fathers have been sent to the Spares Bin, the court system is severely weighted AGAINST us IN FAVOR OF women, in pretty much every aspect you care to name but especially when it comes to divorce and child custody. So why in the gods' names would we want to do ANYTHING that can allegedly make things better for women? Only a thirsty simp, sniveling mangina, or scumpouch white knight would want such a thing.
D) "Men dating younger women is sexism and needs to stop".....That's the best you could come up with? REALLY???!?!?? And people PAY you to write this tripe? I sincerely hope you're getting paid by the word, and not by how much sense or relevance your 'articles' contain. But I'll play along for a few minutes. Suppose that men in their 30s and above were to decide tomorrow to only date women within 3 years of their own age. How is that going to solve 'sexism'? If I wife up a 32 year old woman, will that suddenly make me immune to being raped in divorce court, and having any theoretical children we might have stolen from me? Will putting a ring on a woman that hit the wall 10 years ago keep me from having to pay vagimony when she pulls the eject lever? Does enslaving myself to a twice-divorced mother of four who graduated high school in 1986 magically mean that I'll have a wife that actually treats me like a person, and respects me for ME, rather than disrespecting me, treating me like a slave, and considering me nothing more than a walking ATM and her Alternate Retirement Plan?
"This proposal flies in the face of everything we're taught is normal and inevitable. Take the case of Johnny Depp, who turns 50 next month. His new girlfriend, actress Amber Heard, just turned 27. Described as acting like a "besotted teenager," the thoroughly middle-aged Depp is reportedly eager to start a new family with Heard, who wasn't yet born when he made his film debut in 1984's Nightmare on Elm Street. Last year, Depp separated from his long-time girlfriend (and mother of his two childen) Vanessa Paradis, shortly before she turned 40."
How about we DON'T take the case of Johnny Depp? I know that you are leaving out a lot of information. Critical information. He didn't just wake up one day, realize he was married to a post-Wall hag who sags everywhere that attractive women DON'T, and decide to divorce her. Very, VERY few men do this, and those who have the kind of money he has are much less likely to do so. Divorce is expensive because it's worth it, but it's even MORE expensive for men like Mr. Depp.
"Ours, as Buchanan documented, is a culture which represents men's sexual desirability as being as enduring as women's is fleeting."
"Men age like fine wine; women age like milk."
Our culture doesn't represent "men's sexual desirability as being as enduring as women's is fleeting"...that's just the way it is. On average, a man will be more attractive in his 30's than he was in his late teens. He'll also have several other traits women look for, such as financial stability.
"It's certainly not just graying celebrities like Depp who rob the cradle."
'Rob the cradle'? Newsflash, boyo: your shaming won't work on me, or anyone else who lets logic and reason guide them through life. Simps, manginas, and white knights may respond, but who really cares what they think anyway?
"Research on the preferences of users of OK Cupid, one of America's most popular dating sites, indicates that 'men show a decided preference for younger women, especially as the men get older... so, even though men and women are more-or-less proportionately represented on the site, men's decided preference for younger women makes for many fewer potential dates for women'.
Um, no.....If there are X number of men, and Y number of women, then the number of potential dates for women is X. Only if X decreases are there fewer potential dates for women. You really should have thrown some kind of qualifier in there, such as "fewer potential dates for women WHO ARE 30 OR OLDER". Have I mentioned my disbelief that you could possibly get paid to write? That was a very simple logic and math exercise. And you failed. Miserably.
"According to that tale, heterosexual men who have the sexual or financial cachet to do so almost invariably leave the partners who aren't young enough to be their daughters for the women who are."
Generally it's not 'leaving' the older women, it's 'not getting involved with them in the first place'. Huge difference. My gods, did you really pass high school level English classes?
"In the popular imagination, men do this because they can—and because they're presumably answering the call of evolutionary and biological imperatives that push them irresistibly towards younger women."
No imagination to it; again, it's fact. In cases like Depp, it's made even easier by No-Fault divorce laws (which feminists were so adamant about wanting). And there's no 'presumably', either. Biology is a powerful thing. Even more powerful than the feminists who have tried for decades to rewire people to ignore biology. News flash: it doesn't work that way, and it can't work that way. And as a species we'd better hope and pray that it NEVER works.
Younger females are more fertile and less prone to giving birth to babies with defects, having a miscarriage, or any of the probably hundreds of things that can go wrong with the pregnancy process. Plain and simple, cut and dried. I suspect most men are like me, in that if I'm looking for a mother for my children, I want one that's going to have the best chance of giving birth to a live, perfectly healthy child, as well as her surviving the ordeal and being able to do it again at some point. I most definitely do NOT want a woman who's pregnancy can best be described as 'dicey', and who's age will put the chance of birth defects somewhere above 50%.
"What seems harmless and natural, however, is neither. A culture in which older men value younger women more than their own female peers does damage to everyone.
This is about the way in which young women come of age surrounded by reminders that they are at their most desirable when they are still at their most uncertain and insecure. Some young women are attracted to older men (for a host of possible reasons), but even these find too many men who are, in the end, deeply unsafe."
And you're qualified to make these statements HOW, exactly? I'm not talking about the one relating to female desirability; you're spot-on with that. Women ARE at their peak in their early 20s. I wouldn't go so far as to say that they're at their most uncertain and insecure at that time. I'd probably put that period at 11-13. By the time a woman hits her 20s, she's generally been riding the Cock Carousel for six years (sometimes more). She's had over a dozen partners, if not several score. She's been indoctrinated by feminist propaganda for two entire decades. She's developed an entitled, bitchy attitude. And, most importantly, she hasn't had The Wall re-introduce reality into her life. She's still able to get by on her looks alone, instead of having to work to support herself (you know, like MEN have to do), nor see the big THREE-OH looming and realize that she's still single. No, she's definitely not at her most uncertain and insecure.
"It's not just women who lose out as a consequence of this fixation on the older man, younger woman ideal. Ask women in their teens and 20s who are in relationships with older men about guys their own age, and you'll invariably hear laments about young men's immaturity. That callowness is often oversold by too many aging Lotharios wanting to emphasize the difference between their own supposed expertise and young men's clumsiness. The reality is that just as many young women "grow up too quickly" as a result of older men's attention, many young men grow up too slowly because of a lack of it. If men over 40 spent half as much time mentoring guys under 30 as they do chasing women in that age bracket, more young men might prove excellent partners to their female peers."
There is so much fail here, I'm not certain where to start.
Women are primarily attracted to two things: money and power. It doesn't have to be the kind of power to send an army to smash a country, though that certainly helps. Nor does it have to be Texas Oil Tycoon levels of wealth, though there isn't a woman alive who wouldn't spread her legs for a man who is sufficiently rich enough.
A man who's 10 years older than his prospective partner has life experience that younger men don't (and not JUST in the bedroom), and also tends to be more secure financially than men the same age as the woman in question. Even after going through a divorce and being buried under a mountain of debt, there are very few 18 year olds who can compete with me when it comes to having discretionary cash. I don't have to worry about whether I can afford to take a woman out for dinner. I don't have to choose between date night and making my car payment. And yes, I'm much better in the bedroom than I was at 19. Much. Better.
Why would I 'mentor' guys under 30? Let's assume for a second that I was just like all the Coppertops out there (a thirsty simp); I'm directly competing with approximately 49% of the population when it comes to getting the girl. If you were playing football, would you stop running for the end zone and hand the ball to the other team? I realize you've probably never played a sport in your life, but try using your imagination for a second. The point of a sport is to WIN. In this 'sport' (pussyhound), the point is to bed females. Unless the female in question isn't one that I want, I'll be competing with, quite literally, thousands of other males. Some of them WILL have me beat in the Appearance department. Why in the gods names should I give them even more of an advantage?
"Many people who concede that older men's obsession with younger women is disillusioning and destabilizing insist that the sexual choices of men like Johnny Depp are driven by natural imperatives. That's not quite what the science shows. Research on age disparate relationships does find a biological case for older men choosing slightly younger women; a 2007 study of 11,000 Swedes found that the most fecund men were those with partners six years younger than themselves. The strategic reproductive benefit of choosing a younger woman diminished as the age gap widened. According to the science, Depp was better matched with Paradis (nine years his junior) than with the new girlfriend."
Another paragraph that's bursting with FAIL...
First off, I wouldn't trust ANYTHING that came from Sweden. NO-THING. This is a country whose feminists (read: women) have so thoroughly destroyed the society that they had to pass laws to keep their men from marrying foreign women. Ouch, there's that whole 'free market' thing that Marxists hate so much.
Second, eleven thousand SOUNDS like an impressive number, until you realize that it's only 5500 couples. AND nothing was mentioned about their ages. For all we (the people reading the garbage you wrote) know, the females could all be under 24 and the men could all be in the 28-34 age range. In which case, the point you're trying to make would have been basically disproven.
"So if older men aren't pursuing much younger women because of evolutionary hardwiring, why do they? It's hard not to conclude that much of the appeal is about the hope of finding someone less demanding. A man in his 40s who wants to date women in their 20s is making the same calculation as the man who pursues a "mail-order bride" from a country with less egalitarian values. It's about the mistaken assumption that younger women will be more malleable. Men who chase younger women aren't eroticizing firmer flesh as much as they are a pre-feminist fantasy of a partner who is endlessly starry-eyed and appreciative. The dead giveaway comes when you ask middle-aged men why they prefer to date younger; almost invariably, you'll hear complaints that their female peers are too entitled, too embittered, too feminist."
"Even a blind squirrel finds a nut eventually". You are the proverbial blind squirrel.
Post-Wall women have a gigantic chip on their shoulder to go with their terrible entitlement attitudes. In a sane society there would be a bounty on them.
The desire isn't for a woman who's 'malleable', it's for one who's not cruel, hateful, mean, spiteful, conceited, and entitled....you know, everything that a post-Wall woman IS.
I would say that feminism really screwed up a lot of women, but the theory I've heard is that feminism just removed the mask that women wore. I think that's accurate. I think that, in most regards, they were just as bad all throughout history, it's just that they don't make any effort to hide it anymore. And all the societal controls on the worst attitudes and behaviors of women have been removed, thanks to feminism. AND the very things that make men MEN have been destroyed, again thanks to feminism.
"One of the basic rules of tennis applies here: If you want to improve your skills, you need to play someone who is (at a minimum) at your own level. As sophisticated as a 20-something may be, she will be more so—with a more exquisite bullshit detector—in her 40s."
I don't play tennis. That is a game for queers and women.
In her 40s she will also have a MUCH worse attitude, a whole host of wrinkles (or have had cosmetic surgery or botox to alleviate them), her best parts will sag, and she will most likely have a couple of thugspawn from her years of riding the Cock Carousel. I made the mistake of getting involved with an older woman with kids before; it's not a mistake I will repeat.
"When older men date much younger women, they cheat themselves out of an opportunity to be matched with a partner with the maturity to see them as they really are."
I think what you meant was "see them as an alternate retirement plan, father-figure for their illegitimate thugspawn, or walking ATM". Shall I fix that for you? I should be getting a cut of your pay for writing this garbage, if I'm going to be fixing things for you.
"Depression, the research shows, peaks for men in their mid-to-late 40s."
I wonder if it's just a coincidence that this is also right around the time when most men are experiencing the joy of having their wife pull the eject lever on their marriage?
"If the older man/younger woman dynamic is less "natural" and more destructive than we imagined, how then to respond to couples that make that dynamic work?"
Oh, that's simple. DON'T. Leave them alone. Stop thinking that everyone has to conform to YOUR ideas about what's right and proper.
"It's like attending the wedding of a couple that gets together as the result of an affair: One can wish them every happiness without endorsing what led them there."
No. No, it's not. It's an entirely different animal altogether.
There's nothing wrong with people dating whoever they choose, regardless of the age differences involved. It's perfectly natural for men in their 30s and later to want attractive, fertile women who will birth healthy offspring.
A wedding of a couple that gets together as the result of an affair is an affront to the intelligence of pretty much anyone who isn't a slobbering liberal/feminist/Marxist. I have a sense of decency, therefor I will NOT wish them happiness. I will wish the cheater to get karmic justice.
"I'm not proposing that we shame every age-disparate couple."
Um, actually, that's EXACTLY what you're doing. 'Rob the cradle' sound familiar? As well as all the rest of the hogwash you spewed. It was just one big, long Shame Train.
"I am proposing that we challenge heterosexual middle-aged men to direct their sexual and romantic energies to their female peers."
Why? What possible reason would a man in his 30s have to be with a woman who has all the baggage that women in that age bracket have?
Also, while we're on the topic of challenge.....have you any idea what a challenge it is to get with a female in her early to mid 20s? If she's even halfway attractive, she has many, MANY options when it comes to men. And just because I'm better looking than I was at 21, and more financially stable, AND more worldly, doesn't mean I have an automatic "in" with these women. I'm competing with guys who have known her her entire life....went to school with her since kindergarten....I, on the other hand, have to break the ice and build some kind of rapport. That's a lot harder. I have yet to walk up to a 22 year old, show her my driver's license (age verification) and my pay stub, and bed her immediately.
Personally, I prefer Free Market Dating over having some chucklehead like you tell me who I should date and why. I'll date who I'm attracted to, plain and simple, cut and dried. If that means competing with men 15 years younger than me, so be it. Unlike my female age-peers, I have a lot going for me. If a woman can't see that, that is HER problem.
In case you want to read the entire load of rubbish, here's where you can find it. As always you'll need to replace the X's.
Alternately, perhaps you want to go have fun with the comments section. In which case I say:
Give 'em hell boys!