I gotta get me to some Dean's parties.

Teo digs those older doctors.

Who doesn't?

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner 2: Guess Who's Coming to Swim.

Racists.

37 year old distinguished doctor picks up a young 23 year old thing

Well, it used to be normal. Have you kids screwed that up too?

Still works for me.

The age thing still acceptable, I think, if not normal. When I was 23, I dated men older than that. What used to happen far more often, though was that guys would troll undergraduate populations for future wives. I know of several older couples who met each other while one was taking a class the other was teaching. Of course, back in Olden Tymes, women went to college to meet husbands, right?

Two of my college classmates married their teachers shortly after graduation. One couple is still married and to all appearances, still very happy. They were only about 8 years apart in age.

This isn't commented on much, but it's most peculiar: the wild and crazy sexual liberation of the last 40 years has been accompanied by greatly increased vigilance about questions of relative age. The age of consent has been raised to 16 in all states and 18 in most, there's an enormous hue and cry about sexual abuse (resulting in fraudulent claims and prosecutions), there's increased suspicion even of relationships between adults if the man is more than about ten years older, and there seems to be an upward slippage in the age at which women are regarded as fully adult (e.g. the attitude toward Monica Lewinsky, and Garance's recent Girls Gone Wild thing.)

For the record, I have no skeletons in my closet, but I do find these things odd.

S/B "sometimes resulting in fraudulent claims and prosecutions", in case anyone thinks I was denying that there are many valid claims.

9 is dead-on, in a lot of arenas, too. The greater freedom we have to be explicit about sexuality, the more queasy it seems people are in general about actually having sex. I wouldn't trade our culture for one in which all sex is assumed to be consentual, but good Christ, it's hard when you're an 18-24-year-old woman to convince people that you are totally self-aware about your desires and you actually do want sex.

I don't know where the boundary line is, now, but I think it must be around 25 for women. At 25 or 26, you finally get a little credit for not having some kind of false consciousness about wanting sex.

there seems to be an upward slippage in the age at which women are regarded as fully adult

While I think that is true, it's also part and parcel of a more general upward slippage in the age we see people as adult. Thirty or forty years ago, a man of 20 was seen as just that, an adult man. Less so, now.

I remember being very conscious in my early twenties, particularly after I started college, that for a lot of adults around me, they didn't view people my age as fully adult. And that annoyed the fuck out of me.

Well, isn't the whole suspicion of older-guy/younger-woman thing related to both a sense of unfairness (ie, older men=attractive; older woman=withered hag) and a sense that those relationships are rooted in problematic stuff (man provides money and in exchange he receives beautiful nubile girl). And for that matter, the idea that relationships should now be rooted more in equality and the feeling that a vast difference in age, career and life experience is likely to mean relationship inequality as well.

It's true that there are plenty of people in perfectly successful and fun dramatically-age-different relationships, but surely the model itself is rooted in some rather crappy thinking about gender?

Also, I find it unspeakably gross when male intellectuals are all like "I'll marry an age-appropriate wife when I'm 26 and she can spend her youth supporting my career; then when I have tenure and she's got a weird work history I'll ditch her for a grad student." I have actually purged from my shelves the work of several writers (not ones I cared a lot about, true) when I found out that they'd done this.

And then--as Franco Moretti would have it--the story of capitalist modernity is the story of greater and greater emphasis on age gradation: school, the military, professional associations, etc. And of course market segmentation.

I guess it's hard for me to be really comfortable about the older guy/younger woman thing because my one friend who is really into that is actually kind of creepy about it and not exactly what you might call a feminist. (That is, he's told me that he doesn't want to go out with a woman who has more life or career experience than he does. Among other rather creepy things.) And there's so much recurring rhetoric in our culture about women/expiration date/too old/blah blah.

ttaM is so cute when he gets annoyed like that!

Frowner never complained like that when she was young and cute!

(Joke for symmetry with 14, obviously)

15: Actually, I was gone-out-with when I was under twenty by an older fellow. I thought I was a special unique snowflake, and I found out later than he dated much younger women exclusively. I seriously would not have gone out with him had I realized this, and it makes me feel, to this day, like a real sucker.

Actually, the idea of the expiration date makes me think of a funny phenomenon: all the action going on in nursing homes (or whatever you want to call them). What's odd is that, at least publicly, women and most men above 50 are viewed as more or less sexless (there's a lot of cultural stuff with the guys complaining, but I'm thinking more in terms of daily life - this seems to me to be the common assumption once a couple reaches a certain age). But then, once they're really old, they start doing it like bunnies (without the procreation).

Now, clearly this means that the 50s and 60s aren't as sexless as is supposed, but does it also mean that something changes? One thing that occurs to me is that nursing homes are like coed dorms, plus you have a lot of widowers/widows getting the chance to do it with someone new for the first time in decades.

Does that seem right? Or is my premise just all wrong? (Note that my premise isn't that people stop and then restart having sex, but simply that it seems to actually increase)

9: Isn't it just that as we give up the right to judge the act, we start worrying more about the actors, as they're the only ones who can police the act?

And (to post and post and post) something else that bothers me: "and I'll trade you in when you're older" seems implicit in the "must date young woman" model. I can't be having with that. The people I cared deeply about when younger I care deeply about now that we're sprouting the first grey hairs; in some ways, having the long history together, seeing what's changed them as they age...that's tied up so closely in love and desire that I can't imagine not wanting someone I once cared for merely because they're older now. It's that connection that's so fascinating. (I'm not talking, exactly, about romantic love, though. Romantic love is boring.)

16: Yuck.

Guys are such tools.

Let me ask one thing, tho: In high school, it is the norm that the more desirable (by whatever definition) girls date older guys. The defense of this that I've heard (from the girls' POV) is that HS guys are behind in maturity, and so this is just leveling the playing field. Regardless of the merits of that, does it not set up a model wherein this sort of age imbalance is accepted?

Regardless of the merits of that, does it not set up a model wherein this sort of age imbalance is accepted?

Absent some demonstrable harm, there's no reason why the imbalance shouldn't be accepted. The likelihood of harm almost certainly varies by specific age, circumstances, life events, etc.

Guys are such tools.

Don't be a tool, JRoth.

You're the guy Frowner was talking about, aren't you, ogged?

19 gets it pretty much right.

Except for the part about sprouting grey hairs when you're only - what? - 31 or something?

Lots of people get a gray hair or two or several by the time they're 30.

Hm, I don't think romantic love is boring at all, but then I also don't believe that it really exists as something completely separable from other kinds of love and desire.

Other people's fantasies of romantic love are often, indeed, quite boring.

25: I think parsimon meant that if someone has grey hairs by the time he's thirty, it's totally OK for his significant other to dump him for someone younger.

I'm going to marry a princess who loves to do dishes.

I call the hooker with the heart of gold!

24: Thirty-three next birthday, I'll have you know. And feeling older every minute.

I'm thinking in particular of, you know, First Boyfriend, First Serious Girlcrush...people I really have known for more than half my life.

Actually, I am fortunate in that I don't have grey hairs; mine seem to be coming in blindingly, shiningly white.

At least historically, the opposite of romantic love would be something like what Fielding describes in Tom Jones as "Esteem and Gratitude," which, combined with sexual desire, yields the greatest physical and emotional pleasures imaginable. That sounds pretty good to me. When I've said I am against "romantic love," I just mean I am very suspicious when someone seems not to be able to name what they respect in their partner, but they have, like, a feeling in their heart.

I dated older guys for a long time because the probability of them being queasy about sex decreases with age. It doesn't hold all the time, but my older partners have tended to be less freaked out by what sex "means" to them.

32: I'm going to have to read some of that Fielding.

33: If there's no copy of Fielding readily available, you could just nail old guys. Same thing.

I think that for me, relationships with older guys (or the prospect of such relationships) always wound up feeling just too infantalizing. Forever the kid sister, the clever little student, etc.

Of course it varies. I have friends who are over a decade apart and are absolutely peers; he's a little emotionally backward, in a benign way, and she's very much an oldest-sister type, not used to falling into any kind of tag-along role, so it seems to work out perfectly. Other friends are just five or six years apart, but they met (some ten years ago) when one was a TA for a class the other was taking, and there is a weird condescending dynamic there to this day -- though this is doubtless every bit as much because the older partner is a prick as because of the age/status difference.

I've never had a relationship with anyone not within a year of my age. That said, I don't understand all this disapproval. What's with the judging? Let us not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments.

Here's the relevant chapter, which is a pretty incredible piece of writing altogether, in which he proves the existence of love in the most bullyingly snarky way imaginable. I heart Fielding up and down the street.

Shit. Don't use that link, which cuts it off. Read it here

31: I was teasing, something I do often enough, and people miss it, to my occasional bafflement.

At age 42 -- omigod, omigod, omigod, I must be decrepit! -- I have no grey hairs. I look for them, they are not there. More blondish streaks around my face, perhaps, but I may fancy this.

I've never had a relationship with anyone not within a year of my age

Waiting till you get tenure, huh? Smart, very smart.

I annotate here that "finders of gold" was slang for someone who cleans out latrines.

32.2:

I dated older guys for a long time because the probability of them being queasy about sex decreases with age. It doesn't hold all the time, but my older partners have tended to be less freaked out by what sex "means" to them.

This is truth. And when you become older yourself you don't need men older than yourself in order to find this.

That said, it's really about women and men who have relationship experience behind them.

Yeah, I'm dating a 30yo now, after dating a 35yo for six months and a 45yo for two and a half years. I'm very used to talking very openly about sex with partners, and I really don't think the new guy is. He doesn't seem freaked out, exactly, but quite surprised. This makes me somewhat more reticent than I usually am, and it's not good, because there are conversations we need to have.

I'm trying to reconcile ttaM's sense of not having been considered fully adult when just–gown, which I admit is wrong, with my own "matured" sense of equality, and whom I consider fully grown up.

As I said on some thread last week, I'm on a contract lawyer team now where I'm the oldest by a huge margin. I'm older than any of the parents of my teammates but one, and that dad is only a year older than I am. Men and women in their mid-twenties to early thirties. On a professional level, we're dead equal, learning and sharing as well as I've ever seen it done. But they are all way too young for me to see them as potential sexual equals. One young woman, whom I worked with closely last week, is very pretty indeed, smart and self–aware. But the gap is so huge that I'm not aware of feeling any particular sexual attraction to her; she's just too young.

I'm not saying this would always be my reaction to any young woman, because I have no idea. But the tendency I've noticed is that I don't feel much attraction to women now until they're in their mid-thirties.

Having a seventeen–year–old daughter probably contributes to this.

I remember being very conscious in my early twenties, particularly after I started college, that for a lot of adults around me, they didn't view people my age as fully adult. And that annoyed the fuck out of me.

Which is kind of a symptom of still being kinda adolescent.

In high school, it is the norm that the more desirable (by whatever definition) girls date older guys. . . . does it not set up a model wherein this sort of age imbalance is accepted?

*What* sort of age imbalance? B/c a high school kid who's dating someone who's more than 3 or 4 years older, ought not to be. IMHO. Ten year age differences are for grownups.

talking very openly about sex with partners

Like, how? Talking about sex is one of the few things worse than talking about feelings.

In high school, a 3- or 4-year age difference is huge. Much bigger than a 10-year difference among adults.

46: Yet another assault on the pro-pussification forces. Maybe Standpipe was right.

46: Well, like being able to say, without freaking anyone out, and not during sex, "Hey, you have a seriously huge cock, so when you fuck me really hard from a certain angle, it causes minor internal bleeding. You might want to be more careful."

Talking about sex is one of the few things worse than talking about feelings.

And he's available, ladies!!!

49: Oh, that's just...logistics.

I don't see how talking about sex makes one a pussy. I'm not advocating sitting around saying "I just love your body so much" all day. I'm talking about having the ability to talk openly about what's okay and what's not. This is where we get into consent crises, because if one partner is squicked by talking about sex, then the other will feel really uncomfortable trying to talk about what would promote health, safety, and pleasure.

I don't feel much attraction to women now until they're in their mid-thirties the trunk of my car.

49: This is making me laugh. Yes, of course one needs to have conversations like that! I'd do it during sex, along the lines of "ouch, oh." And later maybe stuff about urinary tract infections, how to avoid. People seem not to know these things.

52: I'm a bit slow today, so it may be that I'm responding to something that's not addressed to me. Ogged made a joke equating talking about sex and talking about feelings, and I made a joke about ogged's joke, in which talking about feelings is a type of pussification.

urinary tract infections, how to avoid

Cranberry juice.

Ogged, would you please tell Tim that it's okay and we're not making you cry? He worries about you so.

I did the firm, clear "Ow!" thing during sex, but I'm pretty sure it will happen again unless I say something. I just can't think of a way to bring it up without sounding like I'm objectifying or complaining, which all sex talk must sound like to someone who doesn't talk about it much.

Cranberry juice.

Since I am a lady, I will not add anything to this. 100% cranberry juice, obvs.

56: Here's how slow I feel today: I'm not sure if B has misread something or I have miswritten something. I'm going to play the percentages and assume B's misreading.

Hey, you have a seriously huge cock

I'm prety sure he'll be okay with the conversation (or any conversation, for that matter) as long as you start it off like that.

Since I am a lady, I will not add anything to this.

Parsimon gets it exactly right.

57: Oh, you're talking about the current 30-year-old?

This is why I sometimes don't understand when you talk about your sex life: you say "it will happen again" as though you're a recipient rather than an active participant. I wouldn't want an ongoing sexual relationship with someone who's sort of blindly engaging in whatever he thinks must be right and good.

Anyway, in this case (incipient internal bleeding), I'd just push back, say "Whoa, slow down, slow, slow," or something along those lines.

I don't get the "objectifying or complaining" concern. Sex is a joint endeavor.

That's all I mean, parsimon, is that's why I like feeling comfortable talking about sex. He's a good guy. If we had a conversation about it, he'd be really careful. But I don't expect everyone I sleep with to remember exactly what the conditions of my "ouch" were in the midst of an intensely passionate moment. It probably would happen again if we didn't talk about it, which we will. I should have used the conditional there, and I'm sorry I didn't, since it leads you to think so poorly of my character.

Doesn't the phenomenon in 9 also run parallel to a trend towards bachelor's degrees for everyone middle class? If we think of supporting oneself as one criterion for adulthood, and we've effectively pushed that back from 18 or 19 to 24 or 25, then it seems reasonable to suppose that the reason we don't treat 19-year-olds as full adults is that they aren't independent enough.

63: Heavens, I don't think poorly of your character. Really.

Now I'm just puzzled, and I apologize for however I phrased things such that it may have seemed that way. Just talk to the guy, and don't worry about how he receives the conversation.

So, for example, a 20 year old dating a 34-year-old would make me pause, because chances are the 20-year-old is still asking mom to help with the car insurance.

66: what if the 34 year old is also asking mom to help with the car insurance?

65: "Poor character" is too strong, parsimon. I guess I sometimes feel like you read me as someone who lacks the confidence necessary to stand up for herself in the face of semi-abusive behavior, though, to me, there's nothing going on that's abusive, just normal clumsy stuff of the type that I'm often guilty of, too. In fact, my larger history of dating is that I tend to overreact to minor quirks and end relationships without bothering to negotiate about the little stuff. I tend to err on the side of intolerance, and I'm trying to work on that. In fact, my larger problem is that I tend to see that reticent, accomodating person I sometimes think you think I am as "poor character," which is not something you've said, but my prejudice, probably a part of my blasted misogyny, that I'm trying to overcome.

Its seems weird people won't talk about sex like that, especially that old.

I don't think i've ever hooked up with a girl older than me, i think i'd go maybe 2 years below my .5age+7 before i was like, ew. i probably hang out with much less alternative people than most unfogger. being in charge seems like a really important part of hte sexymanscript

68.

This is difficult.

I grew up sexually, and romantically, with a partner I wound up being with for 7 years, through thick and thin. We learned together how to make love to each other, so that pattern is ingrained in me. Maximal communication.

On the other hand, I have over time "dated" quite a few people, and sometimes, yes, when it's clear to me that the relationship has no potential, I cut it short without negotiation.

I understand both things. They both carry risks. God knows I've stuck with relationships I should have ditched earlier on: a friend of mind calls these "relationships of convenience," not good for the soul.

I was, yeah, a little concerned for you. I'm not sure what you mean about the misogyny.

I just mean that I tend to feel overly offended when someone insinuates that I am passive-aggressive or [insert other traditionally feminine trait here], because I was raised to associate the feminine with weakness and victimhood. This is one of the few venues in which I've felt comfortable talking through my attempts to stop being such a loudmouthed, aggressive trainwreck. Your concern that I put up with ill treatment is meant as a kindness, but I mistakenly receive it as an insult because, in my reptile brain, victimhood=weakness, etc. Again, I am under construction.

64 is spot-on, I think; there's no real expectation from middle-class people that people in their late teens are fully autonomous, just because the job opportunities open to them are so dead-endy and pay such shit (this might not include people in the military, who nonetheless at 18 and 19 are getting paid shit).

What about the fact that teenage year are now much more strictly controlled by parents for "saftey" so the twenties are when you get to go do the crazy shit you weren't allowd to earlier?

re: 45

No, it really wasn't a symptom of that at all. When I was 21 I'd been out of school for nearly 5 years, and been working in a full-time job earning a living since I was sixteen. Which I suppose ties in with Cala's 64.

It'd probably annoy me less now, as I'm a bit more chilled out, but I've always had, and continue to have, a big chip on my shoulder about my perceived status. It's probably a personal failing, but it's not an age-related one. I can still get equally fucking annoyed about other similar things [although these days I am great at concealing it].

re: age differences more generally. When I was 17 my girlfriend was 23, and when i was 18 the (different) girlfriend I had was 24. On the other hand, my wife is 7 years younger than me. So I've been there with age differences in both directions. To the extent that there have been differences between various relationships I've been in, the age-related differences have been swamped by just the usual personality differences from one person to another.

I hate all of you non-single people. Where's Emerson's monastery again?

Jerry Lee Lewis's 13-year-old cousin wife speaks still well of him. She was only his second cousin twice removed, which is legal even by very strict standards. It wasn't her that he beat to death, either, but some other wife.

I sometimes think age-inequalities are nice because you don't spend so much time worrying about whether you get all each other's references or whether you're at the same place in your careers or not. With Max, I had a built-in 18-year buffer that meant we didn't have to like each other's music, so when we occasionally did, it was nice, etc. With someone your own age, you sometimes think things like, "He really has no idea who Final Fantasy is? What is wrong with him?"

I can't imagine only liking music from a psecific time period.

re: 77

Is that some sort of meta-joke, where you say, 'he has no idea who $foo is?' and then name someone incredibly obscure so that, say, 99.95% of people will have no idea who they are?

Also, 78 is right.

78: But wouldn't you say there's stuff you're oddly attached to because you heard it at a certain age? Some of Max's tastes were timeless, like Talking Heads and Jonathan Richman, but ABBA? That's the sort of thing only an age difference can forgive.

79: Umm, no? What's wrong with you?

So he was dark Fernando and you were blond Agnetha? That's kinky all right.

re: 82

I assume Final Fantasy there is supposed to refer to the dance band , or the violinist, rather than the game/movie.

79: It wasn't intended to be, but I don't watch TV or listen to radio, so I really don't know what people generally listen to. But it seems all my friends own at least one Final Fantasy CD, so when my ex was going through my iPod and was like, "Final Fantasy? Isn't that a video game?" I really had no idea whether this made him a normal average everyday person or totally clueless and uncool. So actually, I really have no way of judging anyone, even if I wanted to, since I have no idea what cool-consensus is at all.

re: 85

Ah, if it's supposed to refer to the german trance band, it's not really an obscure reference. More just a sign your friends all have shit taste in music. [this is where a smiley would go if they weren't banned.]

86: They're from Toronto.

i don'to know what final fantasy is, but it sounds like something scifi-dork related. And i'd listen to abba if i damn well please, if it didn't suck from what i can hear. same thing with ace of base. meh. But the boyband songs i hated in jr high i'll play now, the good ones like 'i want it that way' or 'i want you back', and 'wake me up before you go' or whatever. what does age have to do with it? i only listen to a single shitty poppunk band, but thats becuase i already know the good songs by them. If i dated someone who made us listen to her choice of 90's shitty poppunk bands, i'd probably pick up a couple of song to like.

re: 87

Ah, so the other Final Fantasy (musician).

77: Interesting. One of the main reasons I'm inclined to prefer a close match in age is precisely so that you share a common set of cultural reference points (although this is actually somewhat problematic in my case since I'm so ignorant of so many cultural phenomena of my generation). Otherwise it seems like you'd constantly have to be explaining things to each other.

re: 87

In which case, it is obscure, I suspect. [this is getting repetitive]

i only listen to a single shitty poppunk band

Which one?

Anyone have opinions about Match.com? They're offering a 3-day free trial to members of my graduating class.

Speaking of music, this is great:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orACIBjHuI4

constantly have to be explaining things to each other having conversations.

(Which is a good thing.)

Surely there are more interesting things to converse about than bands the other person's never heard of.

Heh, yeah, at 95

79: $foo="Jandek"

re: 98

s/b Moondog.

someone who knows the same things i do is really fucking boring, i might as well just be talking to myself.

94 looks a lot like that one american Idol winner.

Not a lot of support for the benefits of similar backgrounds, it seems.

I thought it was quite common for college professors to date, sleep with, or marry undergraduates. It is certainly true for law schools as well.

A ten to fifteen year difference isnt that big a deal, particularly if you share common interests.

102-3: The divorce lawyer's sorta on your side, teo. Take heart.

Pardon. It was 94 fucking degrees here today. My roommate just suggested to me that I shower down, as it were. Hot skin.

I couldn't tell you what my point is.

94

Thanks for the link Nattar

re: 106

If you like it, there's a live version here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Xl9rdCPbE

Brings out a bit more of the edginess in it.

Stanley:

I think many of these relationships end up being very successful 6 to 9 year marriages.

102: I've found I really prefer dating guys from middle class midwestern backgrounds, actually, so in that sense I like similarity. It means that we tend to have similar attitudes toward NYC intellectual culture, money, etc. Probably what Max and I fought about most often was stuff like whether religious people are simply delusional stupids (his opinion) and whether the bourgeoisie needs a good smack upside the head (mine). It was tiresome and often baffling for us to find how close-minded each other was about certain things.

I married someone who doesn't even share the same first language as me, so I suppose I like difference. But, prior to that, everyone I've ever gone out with has been Scottish although generally from more middle-class backgrounds than my own. So, who knows.

white bear-- I'd bet serious money that you weren't one of those 18-20 yr olds whose mommies & daddies were phoning their profs, offering such gems as "but suzie couldn't possibly have cheated! she's a good girl!", or "tommy can't possibly deserve a B/C/F in your class! He's always been the smartest kid on the block!". I wasn't either--flipped my own bill for college, t-you. But if you want to know why some of us question, as a general rule, whether the persons of 18-20 who are in our college classes have the maturity to make the decision to have sex or get into a sexual relationship with someone who is both older and has power over them (like a prof/teacher), it's things like those phone calls... Don't you get those phone calls now too?
... just sayin.

Oh God, I would never date a college student, and wouldn't even if I weren't an instructor. When I was a college student, I mostly dated outside of college when I could.

I am happy to say I don't get calls from parents, never have. i have friends who have, though, and it's terrifying to me.

That song is kinda depressing, ttaM.

Yeah, it made me a little teary all three times I listened to it.

i would have so much trouble not telling those parents what awful parents i thought they were

All I heard was "New client who probably didnt have prenup or a partnership agreement!"

105: It's 93 here right now. 10% humidity, though.

white bear-- the first such phone call I got was frightening. Now it's just funny-- get patiently through the call, report it to Chair, then knock on the door of every single colleague to see who has received most insane such call in the past week or month or semester. Then laugh. A lot. I myself take great comfort in all the procedures that go along with such things-- especially in the case of plagiarism, because I've yet to encounter such a case that wasn't easily demonstrable. That's the convenient thing about cheaters--if they were willing to work at the cheating, they'd work at the class, b/c it'd be less work than it takes to cheat and get away with it.

i've checked my AC a couple times today to make sure its on.

I can't believe Nash didn't have the...class...to at least acknowledge her lyrical debt to Emerson. Typical Brit.

yoyo--I could see that, but I myself feel no temptation to talk to brick walls. And by the time someone is making that phone call, the wall is up and tornado-proof.

70s and sunny here; but I'm sure your locales have things to recommend them.

I would never date a college student [...] When I was a college student, I mostly dated outside of college when I could

[ref whistle] Categorical Imperative violation!

i dunno, sometimes i really enjoy talking circles around people.

At 2pm it was around 90, temp and humidity, precisely when I played basketball in direct sunlight. We won, but I was starting to see stars after about an hour.

Mairena was -- notwithstanding his angelic appearance -- basically rather ill-tempered. From time to time he would receive a visit from some paterfamilias complaining, not about the fact that his son had been flunked, but about the casualness of Mairena's examination process. An angry scene, albeit a brief one, would inevitably occur:

"Is it enough for you just to look at a boy in order to flunk him?" the visitor would ask, throwing his arms wide in feigned astonishment.

Mairena would answer, red-faced and banging the floor with his cane, "I don't even have to do that much. I just have to look at his father!"

Antonio Machado, "Juan de Mairena", XVII

Been in the 90's here, but drops down in the evening. 70's right now. Humidity is bad times. Always dry up here in Salt Lake.

Some of Max's tastes were timeless, like Talking Heads and Jonathan Richman, but ABBA? That's the sort of thing only an age difference can forgive.

Playing music pedant (despite the fact that I had never heard of Final Fantasy), this invites questions:

First of all, both Jonathan Richman and Talking Heads challenged and deconstructed pop formula, while ABBA is one of the great practitioners of formulaic pop. Someone that listens to and cares about all three has interesting tastes in music. Someone who listens to all three, but doesn't really care about them reminds one of Rob's (foolish) complaint in High Fidelity (from memory) "You can't like both Art Garfunkle and Solomon Burke, that's like supporting the Israelis and the Palastinians."

Secondly, which talking heads, and which Jonathan Richman? "Stop Making Sense," with Bernie Worrell from Parliament on keyboards, or the Brian Eno produced "Remain In Light" with a very dated electonic sound? Johnathan Richman and the Modern Lovers who recorded a number pop classics (released with terrible album art), or Jonathan Richman solo who is good, but very idiosyncratic?

Which, aside from being stupidly pedantic, is just to say that I find appealing people who have sincere but contradictory tastes (or, at least, apparently contradictory tastes), and are interested in those contradictions. It's frustrating, on the other hand, to ask someone why they like two things with diametrically opposed aesthetics and have them reply that they never really thought about, they just happen to like them.

113 and 114

Yeah, but it's good, nonetheless.

If you need cheering up, the new Dizzee Rascal album has the best old skool Public-Enemy-sampling party hip-hop tune ever.

i always thought both talking heads and modern lovers were a bit overrated.

Re: the being-treated-your-age thing that ttaM is talking about in 74 and elsewhere: It was maddening to me at that age (18 or so). In retrospect I think a lot of the anger came from my (accurate) perception that the elders in question weren't actually paying attention to my maturity or lack thereof -- they were working off of a generic script about 18-year-olds. Granted, I was in an atmosphere with a lot of immature 18-year-olds.

Re: having relationship reference points in common. I dunno, I have unusual gaps in my pop-culture knowledge and a wider-than-usual amount of trivial knowledge. I can't imagine dating or not dating based on someone's cultural literacy at that level. I can imagine that lack of awareness about the world would be a huge turn-off. But there are so many great ways to be engaged with the world!

Way back to 9, I'm surprised you're surprised about the increased tenseness about age differences over the last 40-50 years: it's a straight up consequence of feminism. The relationship with a big age difference that no one found even a little surprising fifty years ago was always older-man/younger-woman (obviously there were flipped versions, but they were uncommon and not viewed as a norm), and it wasn't a problem because a big power differential in a marriage was also the norm. There wasn't anything at all odd or unseemly about a man wanting to be in charge within the relationship, and picking a partner that made that more likely (like, if you're Jerry Lee Lewis, a thirteen-year-old) wasn't odd or unseemly either.

Now, while we haven't reached feminist nirvana, a man who openly says he doesn't want to be involved with a woman who's his equal is generally ill thought of. Big inequalities in age aren't always going to correspond to inequalities of power, but they often will, even if just because the older partner is probably more professionally advanced and has more money. So, someone systematically dating a lot younger than he is looks like he's playing sexist power games, and that looks bad these days.

This should not be understood as a condemnation of all relationships with age differences -- I'm in one myself, if you count a six year span. But I can't see what's confusing about why, when women were explicitly supposed to be weak and dependent, that it was normal for older men to date and marry teenagers, and now that wanting women to be weak and dependent is less acceptable, that it's much less normal for the same sort of thing to happen.

In many cases still, the woman expects the man to have more money and selects that way. Even if it's not a conscious issue, guys with money to spend are more fun and better at getting things done. Whatever changes feminism has brought are only partial, and not only because women's pay still isn't equal.

Feminism also wouldn't explain the tendency to treat young adult women as juveniles incapable of giving consent, and the age of consent was raised in states which rejected the ERA and feminism.

Well, feminism does make us hyper-aware of false consciousness, which allows those on the right to use it as a tool against women's choices all the time.

And whether or not the "tenseness" as you call it has roots in essentially progressive changes, the "policing" of it seems to be following a "broken windows" policy. Being able even to see or feel sexual attraction outside of narrow age bands is often treated conventionally as skeevy. Becks' "Cougar" crack to you last week, or some of the things Ogged has said to me, while obviously light-hearted, do tend, and might from many people be intended, to put you on notice.

133: And older-man younger-woman relationships are still much more common than the reverse -- the changes feminism has made are, as you say, only partial. People have just gotten tenser about them.

Feminism also wouldn't explain the tendency to treat young adult women as juveniles incapable of giving consent,

Oh, sure it would. No one's doing that literally -- there's no movement to hike the age of consent past 18 -- people are just reacting as if women through their early twenties are more likely to be easily manipulated, and as if they think that's a problem. And the first part of that is just true.

While it's not true for everyone, caveat caveat caveat, and with apologies to ttaM at 18, with all other things being equal, if you take two people one of whom is twenty and the other of whom is forty, the latter is going to have a huge advantage pushing the other person around: money, of course, but also the kind of interpersonal skills that it takes a while to develop. I had friends in their twenties dating much older men, and while they were basically strong competent people, they were completely overmatched in any conflict (and the relationships generally ended either when they figured that out, or when it stopped being true).

If you are vaguely queasy about relationships with a strongly unequal power dynamic, then you're going to be queasy about a 20-40 pairing unless you have some reason to believe this one is different. And often it won't be.

(None of this, IMO, means much when the younger partner gets close to thirty. At that point I think you've got close to as much interpersonal force as you're ever going to have.)

I should say for 'no one', above, that G/arance F-R is, but I don't think she's got a real constituency on this.

John, I think part of the age thing is displaced anxiety about the sexual revolution. Women's sexuality has traditionally been something policed and controlled by the community. Now that adult women have greater autonomy, the community seizes on its power to police and control the sexuality of young women and pitches a big hysterical fuss about it. Look at the periodic furor about high school girls giving blow jobs or college girls hooking up.

Oh, that's probably also true. A sixteen-year old girl having sex because her father has agreed to hand her off to a husband isn't a problem -- she's under control. A sixteen-year old girl having sex for the fun of it is a potential man-eating harpy who needs to be stamped out.

i always thought both talking heads and modern lovers were a bit overrated.

I have a couple of Talking Heads albums, and I only like Stop Making Sense. I don't Remain In Light is a bad album, but it doesn't do anything for me. The Moder Lovers, on the other hand, I adore. I only have the Beserkly Years compilation, but I think the songs there range from very good to truly excellent. "Pablo Picasso", "Martian Martians", "Dodge Veg-O-Matic" are all just great.

Per 138, I thought I was reasonably aware of American social history, but this recent novel about real events is a new one on me:

During World War I, 30,000 American women were rounded up, and half of them were detained, often for months, for the supposed purpose of preventing the spread of venereal diseases in soldiers. Some of the arrested were prostitutes, while others were so-called charity girls, young women who picked up men at dance halls simply to have a good time.

So, yeah, a lot of social anxiety. And a long history of using genuine fear combined with biogtry to persecute particular groups.

LB, I just don't get the way you're looking at power dynamics. If an older person has developed some attractive characteristic (worldliness, know-how, yes, even wealth) that the younger person wants to share or experience, then it doesn't seem like an exercise of power to use that desirable characteristic to charm them into a relationship. People have something to offer each other in all relationships -- presumably people your own age have youth and vitality and beauty and shared experience to offer.

It would be different if getting into a relationship would permanently entrap you into a situation where you lost choice, but that's just not true in 21st century America. There's birth control and without kids relationships are pretty easy to exit -- you say your friends left when they experienced their needs not being met.

It seems like you have a particular vision of what counts as 'legitimate' sources of attraction between two people in a relationship. Which I sort of can see, but sort of not. I mean, someone your own age is certainly best for a partnership where you journey through the same growth stages of life together, which is a romantic vision. But someone of a different age could complement you precisely because they are at a different stage.

This should not be understood as a condemnation of all relationships with age differences -- I'm in one myself, if you count a six year span.

Cradle robber.

People have something to offer each other in all relationships -- presumably people your own age have youth and vitality and beauty and shared experience to offer.

If one's bringing wealth and knowledge, and the other is bringing their young hot bod, it's still going to be a bit unequal.

Okay, first, remember that I said this:

This should not be understood as a condemnation of all relationships with age differences -- I'm in one myself, if you count a six year span.

and caveated all over the place. I'm not condemning all relationships with a big age difference, or with a power differential. There can be all sorts of reasons to fall in love with someone, including someone sixteen years older than you are, and a relationship like that can be wonderful.

But very young adults are likely to be poorer; they're likely to be emotionally immature; they're just less likely to be able to successfully stand up for themselves. Fifty years ago, there was nothing wrong about a man explicitly seeking out a very young woman for her weakness and dependence. Now that looks bad, and a man systematically dating very young women is going to be suspected of doing just that. (Someone who, say, dates much older and much younger women at different times, not so much.)

Marcus, I think LB's words are a lot more measured than that read of them implies. My experience is pretty well aligned with the latter three paragraphs of her 136.

While I certainly know people with age differences in their relationships that seem to be fine or even beneficial to them, they're in the minority. Large age-difference relationships often evoke a the same kind of queasiness in me that I feel when I see a person manipulating their s.o. through class privilege. It's hard to be around, and it's hard to understand how it's healthy or appealing.

Which is not to say I go around offering my brilliant relationship wisdom unsolicited to these couples.

144: Clearly you haven't seen "The Blue Angel".

I don't think success and worldliness for beauty and youth is necessarily an unequal tradeoff, as there can be plenty of power associated with youth and beauty. I think it's more that people regard it as an icky tradeoff. Perhaps because if it were the only think going on in the relationship it might seem akin to prostitution. Personally, I say whatever works for both people.

Of course, I found the whole thing ickier when I was 25 then I do now that I'm in my late 30s.

Maybe this would all be more clear if y'all described some of the older male / younger female interactions you've known. Slowly.

a man systematically dating very young women is going to be suspected of doing just that

Absolutely. I have dated older men for their increased experience and comfort with themselves, but when I once went out with a guy whose very attitude was "I have nothing to offer except my being established, moneyed, and cultured," by, like, trying to woo me into a relationship by mentioning all the free tickets he got by being a writer at a certain established magazine, he went from being an otherwise-attractive older guy to being a sort of creepy person who was interested in younger women because he was self-consciously trading on his status. That is, the very comfort-with-self I was looking for in the older partner was undone by his explicitation of the exchange-commodities he was bringing to the relationship other than personality, looks, sex, etc.

I think it's more that people regard it as an icky tradeoff.

Possibly because there is a strong cultural narrative that holds up longterm relationships as an ideal, and youth and beauty are transient.

145: yeah, I agree, relationships that actually rest on one partner not being able to speak up for themselves or assert their needs are very unhealthy. But I would also say that young women are much less likely to be dependent and weak than they used to be, especially if they come from a strong family that backs them up. I mean, everyone looks for guidance when they're young, but fifty years ago a woman on her own was in real trouble. Now it's totally the norm, and everyone is quite aware of it and in fact takes it more or less for granted as a life stage. One concern I would have about dating a woman much younger than me (say, 25 or under), was that she'd just be in teh experimental young adult fooling-around stage and wouldn't be ready for marriage, which I feel like I am.

P.S. I'd also have a million other doubts about dating somebody any younger than their mid to late 20s too, BTW. I never want to be in a relationship where I feel the slightest temptation to start out a sentence with "when I was your age..."

plenty of power associated with youth and beauty.

Yeah, less than you'd think. Being a desirable object can do some things for you, but in the absence of the sort of interpersonal skills/emotional maturity that I'm claiming comes with age, it doesn't get you equal treatment within a relationship.

145 seems to be pretty much right. It's not that we're worried that the virginal young woman will be corrupted by the scheming older man, but that at an age (generalizing) where she's emotionally immature, financially less well off, and generally not sure who she is, the older guy, even if he's well intentioned, is going to overwhelm her a little bit. And yes, that presupposes that a relationship* should be between relative equals and allow the other person to grow.

In my (limited) experience, the other problem is that two people with a significant age difference are at very different stages in their lives. One wants to see the world for the first time and then maybe think about grad school; the other's already done all that. And they may really really like each other and be in love and all that, but when push comes to shove, the younger person's got a lot more living left to do.

*if we're just talking sex, who cares.

I have close friends who first got involved with a significant age difference (well, not really so significant now that they're well older, but it was at the time). He helped pay her way through college and grad school when her own family was not a reliable source of support. Also gave her plenty of useful advice on the politics of grad school, career, etc. And yes, she's the sort of woman who likely would have dumped him if he hadn't (she had plenty of options and other suitors throughout -- one power of youth, beauty, and energy is that you tend to have a lot of those). She's quite successful now. So it all depends.

You know, one other thing about power -- anyone living in 21st century America who thinks they can run a one-way relationship and not meet their partner's needs is living in a fools paradise. In the long run, no one has more power to make you miserable than an unhappy spouse who thinks you're to blame. It might take two years, five years, ten years, but it will happen. That has nothing to do with youth, beauty, or anything else, it's the nature of the nuclear family.

didn't mean she would have dumped him if he didn't pay for stuff, but if he hadn't been fully supportive. Also, second paragraph did not mean to imply that there aren't people out there who try to exploit others in relationships, just that they're stupid and will likely pay a serious price eventually.

In many cases still, the woman expects the man to have more money and selects that way.

Bah.

Bah

Do you really think this isn't common anymore?

Of course it's common. And if it works for those people who choose it, great. Not my cup of tea, but I'm not actually a party to any of those marriages.

I think B's just saying it's not her cup of tea, either. Which is not so surprising.

B's just saying it's not her cup of tea, either.

(cough) Koi Pond! (cough)

That would work better if she hadn't been the breadwinner for the past several years (IIRC).

Ahem, Mr. B. earned zero money for the three years before the koi pond, thankyouverymuch. Whereas even now, I am earning *some* money. Because I have "issues," admittedly, but even so.

B just has a better eye for the long strategy than most.

Right, which is why I got a PhD in English, like a fucking idiot.

most of the time, money either is a class indicator, or is a way for the man to justify to himself why he is awesome and should be confident (ie, act like he's of high social status) which is the actual thing women look for

Heh.

Stop reading Maxim, yoyo.

When he's out of school and looking to buy that first house, he'll see that the actual money thing is a pretty big deal.

Money matters to *everyone* who wants to buy a house.

I'm just saying, women who date rich guys aren't doing it because "rich guys are confident."

You mean women who *exclusively* date rich guys. There are, you know, some women who date rich men who happen to like them, money notwithstanding. Just like there are some guys who date beautiful women because they actually think they're awesome people.

Just like there are some guys who date beautiful women because they actually think they're awesome people.

Or even just legal women, for the same reason. Love is an endless mystery.

re: 136:
This might be a male/female thing, but when I was 17-18 I was involved with a 35-6 year old, and while she was not shy about asserting herself, I was a punk kid and not shy about manipulation, and, to my eternal shame, it often worked. It could be that her emotional stratagems were so subtle that I still don't see them, but I don't think so. And money didn't enter into it: I liked her because she was smart, had good taste, and was kind. Why the hell she liked me I still can't figure out, but it sure as hell wasn't because I had money.

Where were you people with this "inequalities of power" stuff when everyone was criticizing me for not wanting to date older women?

criticizing me for not wanting to date older women?

Don't listen to those cougars, they've got an agenda.

Look, Teo, you have to date *someone*. Shit or get off the pot.

I don't have to.

173: yeah, anyone who has ever known a teenager should understand that young people are perfectly capable of manipulating older people. They're less artful at it, but their higher energy level lets them be more relentless.

What is it with this cougar fixation? I had to scheme for ages to get my older woman. She was no cougar, or a reluctant one at most. Doesn't the elaborate construction of a cougar trap disqualify the entrapped from cougarhood?

Also, 176 is wrong. You could just play increasingly elaborate computer games and work at meaningless jobs until you turn nihilist by 30.

Speaking of cougars, is anyone going to watch "Age of Love" tomorrow night? Cougar central!

I note that no one has responded to my 93.

Match is the Sears of online personals. Edgier than eharmony, but a lot more bland/suburban than any other service. But choose carefully and you might find a good one.

Don't be afraid to just post on craigslist, you never know and it's free. Trying to flirt with people on blog comment threads is probably better than any other method.

hey, if i had money, or was dating someone who did, i'd buy these trousers: http://www.unfogged.com/archives/comments_6982.html#569334

maxim? i gotta say, the best part about posting here is i have absolutly no idea how you's will react to what i say.

I thought 165 was pretty much right on. I guess I would add that the ability to actually buy whatever you want and not worry about the cost really does make you more confident. If you know how to use it, then money lets you move through the world in a different way. But if you don't, it won't help you. It's the way you move that's attractive, money is a tool.

Ok, on the new topic: i might try online dating, with facebook. Does one chat up one's friends' friends, or random girsl?

I'm not denying that sometimes people date other people just to get expensive dinners or fancy jewelry. Just that the strong finding of attactiveness for men in say studies of online dating aren't really about the money, for the most part.

He who reads the New York Times "Modern Love" column should be wary of becoming the New York Times "Modern Love column". And stare not too long into the abyss, or the abyss will stare into thee.

meanwhile, social advice:

I thought it was quite common for college professors to date, sleep with, or marry undergraduates

well, it is a bit nouveau riche but I wouldn't say actually "common". I mean give these people a break, they are college professors after all.

It's about height.

my 'friend' had a threesome with her prof, and then the prof got a divorce, and then they dated, and now they broke up. then she caused lots of drama with my real friends, and now i don't talk to her. but i think she graduated now.

Dinners or fancy jewelry? Is this a rap video?

Money's not going to overcome an extra chromosome or a hump on your back, but quite a lot of people aspire to a certain lifestyle, and that lifestyle is bought with money, not the "way you move."

185: With facebook, definitely not random strangers. You might have more luck with friends of friends, but I'd check with the friends before trying anything.

isn't that cover by the 'class marker' thing? i assumed, otherwise, we are talking about people dating w/in their class.

even for just "hey good music taste lets chat" kind of missives? this sounds really dumb now.

190: I was thinking about the initial seduction phase, for deciding who to marry it's a different deal.

Bullshit, I'm confident, and I don't have shit. I guess this is an artifact of the punk rock ethos of my youth , but I am not particularly inclined to give deference to those who make good money. When I made shitloads of money in the 90s, I didn't feel or act differently, I just ate more sushi. Like Popeye and God, I yam that I yam, and damn and fuck those who doubt me.

195 to 184.

193: Yeah, you're better off not contacting total strangers out of the blue (unless they explicitly say in their profiles that they're looking for dating or whatever, which imo is pretty rare). Facebook's not primarily a dating site, though I'm sure some people use it that way, so you have to be a bit careful about who you approach and how.

i don't see what could go wrong, i might try it if i'm bored tomorow morning.

to be honest, i'm not sure what facebook priamirly. it seems like a big schwaste of time. teleology can suck it, anyway.

195: No, I wasn't saying money was necessary for self-confidence at all, just that it can help those of us without natural swagger pull it off a little better. I'm a worrier, unattractive characteristic in general, when I stopped having to worry about money it helped.

Men who truly have the touch with women hardly need a dime. Their next girlfriend will support them anyway.

198: The worst that can happen is that she ignores you (or maybe writes back angrily, but that doesn't seem very likely). If you're okay with that, go ahead, I guess.

Teo, Match is pretty not-happening, from what I understand. Nerve is always good, and you can create a profile and stuff for free; you just have to pay if you want to contact people. But that way you could get on, poke around, see who you like and find out if they like you (you can "wink" and put people on a "hot list," which they'll know when they log in) before you decide whether you want to spend the money.

Money's not going to overcome an extra chromosome or a hump on your back, but quite a lot of people aspire to a certain lifestyle, and that lifestyle is bought with money, not the "way you move."

Many of my young lawyer friends discovered, to their annoyance, that when they were trying to date women while in law school, they were at a distinct disadvantage on the dating market competing against young lawyer with jobs or the investments crowd. Some of the women they dated seemed to be very shallow, but for the rest the calculation was more like, "You seem to be nice enough, but I want to be settled down in two years and you will just be getting started on your career."

Anyone who says money doesn't matter is either of sufficient means themselves or lying. It's not the most important thing in a relationship by far, but I'd bet the lack of it breaks up more marriages than 'doesn't have my taste in music.'

Dating differs so much from crowd to crowd, though, that you kind of need to know your market. Money and settling down don't matter too much in the circles in which I move, for example. In fact, I've always felt a little guilty about being rather put off by activist types who can't-won't support themselves to a degree that they can afford the movies regularly and the occasional pair of shoes. This is an attitude that it's okay to have but not okay to articulate in circles/I/move.

But yeah, I seem to recall a study somewhere about how serious arguments in relationships were most often caused by money. I'm very glad that I have no plans to have a kid and that I may be able to get by without a car, because that way I have enough money that there's not too much need to argue about it.

Oh, it's not good manners to articulate it, no matter the circle. It's just put in other terms, like 'having the same interests as me', or 'being in good shape', or 'values education', or 'has nice teeth.'

Not everyone's shooting for a picket fence, of course, and I'd be willing to bet there's a very wide range. But I hear a lot of people insist they don't care about money, and I don't, oddly enough, see those same college-educated people asking out the clerk at the grocery store. I like shivbunny for lots of reasons, but before he moved down here we were both pretty clear that he had some debt that needed to be paid off.

Weirdest case recently: a young woman at the pre-marriage thing shivbunny and I had to attend, insisting she didn't care about money, just her Catholic spirituality, while wearing her two-carat engagement ring while her fiancé grilled me about where I could possibly be having a wedding on five months notice because you can't get anything good that fast. I swear he was hoping I'd say we were having it at McDonald's.

"insisting she didn't care about money, just her Catholic spirituality, while wearing her two-carat engagement ring"

Nobody who has money cares about money. It isn't important to them, in a bad way.

Right, which is sort of the reason it's bad to care about money. If you care about it, you're admitting you don't have it.

I've read that relationship difficulties are about 1. money 2. sex and 3. messiness, housekeeping, etc., in that order of frequency.

93, 181, etc.: Match.com does indeed seem to be rather bland, from what I hear. I've heard very good things about okcupid.com, actually, and it's built around (what I assume to be) a sort of factor-analysis infinite series of personal questions that can actually get kind of addictive (at least for those who have procrastination issues). If they have enough of a userbase in your area, go for it. Plus, free.

Oh, and, Teo, I think the narrative arc of the mineshaft really -does- demand you date someone.

Sadly, given that it's the narrative arc of the Mineshaft, it demands that you date Labs.

And after a tempestuous romance and stormy breakup with Labs, move to Minneapolis, marry Frowner (whom you will woo away from the activist "lifestyle"), and settle down in a leafy suburb with picket fences.

212: and then post pictures of your exotic sex acts with others where someone can find them.

Even though this is like 24 hours after I read this thread, I think I'll add in my two cents about Match.com. I tried it in Austin, and there were like 200 girls in my age range. On OKCupid, there are 3000. I'm not entirely sure the numbers they're giving are comparable, but my experience of the selection at OKCupid is that it's much wider. And their match algorithm really does a good job as a first pass. I've looked through people with less than a 60% match with me, and didn't find anyone interesting.