Baybay

I`ve already been inspired by that woman a long time ago and think it`s a very good and pure relationship that can be developed between an older woman and a very young guy like me..:)I guess this desi is living the fantasy of a lot of guys I know.

re everyone
very interesting discussions, all of you. i am rushed so cant respond, but doesnt seem like i have to.

SR, i forgot about the biological argument for older woman-younger man -- thanks!

saima, if only! i dont think men working to get nubile women makes it better for the nubile women. and what about the not nubile women?

re baal bacchay
amongst some of my relatives and family friends baal bacchay did imply women and children -- i was never considered with the literal meaning, but how it was used.

finally, ``What people find most
troubling and shocking about an older woman younger man relationship is the sex. Many
of us have a hard time accepting women as sexual agents, as opposed to sexual objects.
In a relationship where the woman is older, it is impossible to see her as the object and
in fact, the man is always considered her boy-toy. To be confronted, thus, by a
`middle-aged` woman`s sexuality is more than we can take.`` comments, anyone?

re `how many people actually find older women attractive`..
someone already pointed out beverly crusher,i think she`s very hot. mussarat shaheen anyone? the `long gavacha` woman? lesse now who else...this woman i work with..it really has nothing to do with age , to me anyway.
as for why do women shave their legs etc,a lot of them don`t.sure the men might find it odd at first, but if it comes to a choice between you plus hair or no hair and no you they might stick around anyway. in fact, think of it as an automatic filter.if they like you undepilated and unrepentant, they really like you.

Re: BG and replies

As always, very interesting topic and even more interesting replies. Personally, I think that there`s nothing wrong with older women marrying younger men. I wouldn`t hesitate in marrying an older woman if she`s my type. My grandma was older than my grandpa. So what? We never even could tell. Not because it did not show, but because it didn`t matter. And it never made any difference either. We loved them and respected them because their relationship with us, their grandchildren, was unaffected by their age difference. Grandma was still grandma, grandpa was still grandpa.

And for those of us who would like to eradicate the traditional family structures, you don`t know jack about nothing when it comes to relationships. I too want to play with and take care of my grandchildren just as my granparents played with us and took care of us. I want to read stories to them just like my grandparents did. ``Family`` is a building block of a normal society where people learn to be humans. I wouldn`t trade anything in this universe for my parents, my siblings, my grandparents, my cousins, etc. The lack of sense of belonging that I sense in some of the replies is not normal. The need for a family is not bound by tradition, class, custom and tribal system. It is a basic human need and want that ensures social, psychological and physical satisfaction.

Re: Anita Zaidi

The ``first generational carrer woman`` remark was not directed personally at you. That was a general observation on my part, and I apologise for not
clearly articulating that, - It could be construed as personal affront, which I deeply regret.

Ms Zaidi I wish that everybody can fulfill all their needs and desires, but it is rarely practical- , we are clearly faced with competing priorities and responsibilities throughout life, consequently we do compromise and sacrifice, sometimes for our kids and at other times for our spouse. Whatever ``two people decide`` may be good for their relationship but it does not imply family welfare. Family welfare inherently applies put the good of family ahead of individual needs and desires. We may lull ourselves into a sense of false security that pursuing our dreams and desires, does not necessarily conflict with our family responsibilities, but many times it does. It is this competetion between western individualism and eastern family values that we always skirt the issue. The effects are not apparent immediately, partly because of our over-confidence in our decision making ability and partly because we are firm believers in the pseudo-intelluctual infallibality clause, - because we are successful professionals, we are successful parents and spouses as well.

From a purely familial perspectives , careers are their to sustain and nourish the family requirements so that we as individuals can enjoy family life in a financially secure environment.
Unfortunately many a time, blind ambition, greed and very often individualistic desires on part of both spouses, - results in a very career-centric life, where family obligations play second fiddle to personal professional ambition. This is particularly true in demanding professions such as medicine, law and engineering.

American society is full of dysfunctional desis, - mainly products of an earlier generation, whose parents had their priorities reversed.

Re: RanaRansher

I do think that societal conditioning plays a key (although not the only) role in whom we find attractive. Excluding prehistory, positions of power have been occupied almost exclusively by middle-aged or older men. Therefore they look attractive. As we gradually shift to a more egalitarian social system with equal opportunity for women, older women will look attractive too. Traditionally, women have let themselves age excessively - thought that now that the children are grown-up and gone, its time for them to shrivel up and die. Now, there`s a whole life of freedom to look forward to. Additionally, after much neglect older womens` health issues have also gotten attention. Osteoporosis is going to be mainly a disease that our grandmothers and mothers needlessly suffered from (the problem that makes bones lose mineral so that women lose height and bend over), safer versions of estrogen have been developed. There will be no such thing as menopause.

Yes, the world`s a changing. And men who have been used to getting their way have good reason to worry about what the future may bring.

As an aside, I agree with you about the hair removal business - but that`s a whole another debate. Will come back to it at another time.

Re: iconoclast

Girls are bombarded from a very young age to be receptive to the idea of Prince Charming as their hero and saviour. They grow up having this expectation from a marriage. As we actively move away from such gender-based conditioning, these naive expectations will give way to more realistic ones.

Re: SR

Malthus in fact advocated marrying older women, or not marrying at all as a way of decreasing population growth rates. He called this a ``preventitive check`` on the population, as opposed to ``positive`` and less adaptive checks (enhanced mortality through war, famine, disease etc.).

Re: Syed Ahmed

In my view equality in a relationship is a simple concept really. It means that both people in the relationship should have an equal opportunity to pursue their dreams and desires, whatever they may be, and regardless of gender. If you have that, you have equality. That`s what I mean by saying ``harmonious relationships need no longer be based on a male breadwinner, and a female stay-at-home figure.`` A relationship could be whatever the two people in the relationship decide would be good for them as a couple, and as a family.

Also, just for the record - I am not a first generation professional. My mother, the most highly educated among her family of five brothers, studied medicine in the `50`s, and went on to specialize in England. I was born during her residency.

Anita

And how many women would not fall for the ever protecting heroes of the damsels in distress and instead opt for the boys in distress who need their guidance and protection in life......

Again wondering aloud

--

Iconoclast

And by the same token, would women free themselves of their own shackles and fall in love with shorter, weaker, poorer, dumber, stay at home dad Men.

or is it just a case of wanting to have the cake and eat it too....

just thinking out loud......

Re: SR

Always Enjoy your replies .

-

Iconoclast

Dear BG;

As is usual I read the article and agree with most of the ideas presented. Why should, `A Marriage happen in quite the standard way` is something I have always questioned. IMHO though, no matter how much we wax on the institution, it is on its way out. Marriage and the nuclear family is becoming more and more a dated concept. An anachronism as it were. Its purpose has ceased to validate its traditions and its conditions. Also Companionship is no longer such a gender related need in the first place. As for age; it is quite truly (for me at least) all in the mind. Age has worked as a signal for sexual desirability, procreation, earning potential, adaptability etc. Nice young people make pretty wedding pictures on the sideboard; the moment of eternal beauty and a memento of immortality.

I think that as time passes or stays whichever way you see it, stranger arrangements then a 20 year age difference will become the norm, the convention, that boring tradition. Relationships will and are based on a different agenda than before.

I also feel that more and more the crucial decision will not be that men prefer nubile women, but who the nubile women prefer. Some would say that has always been so. Why else do men work?

In any case, we are in a brand new era where the sky`s limit is bigger than before. (Here`s to Mr Adholescent Caprio and Ms Experienced Winslet):)

BG:

A great theme: the gender age-gap!

As Anita pointed out, women`s life expectancy at birth is 7 years (somehow I`d remembered 9 years, but let`s just take 7 as the number) longer than that of men. On average the man tends to be a few years older in a typical marriage. Let`s just arbitrarily say the typical husband is 5 years older. (This is pretty close to the Indo-Pak data quoted by Anita.) Well, simple arithmetic tells us that the average woman can look forward to a period of widowhood lasting 12 years at the tail end of her life. That explains why if you ever visit an elderly community you`ll notice a whole lot of women and far fewer men.

Since companionship in old age (and NOT sex during youth) is one of the most beneficial rewards of being married, it behooves women to marry men who are, on average, 7 years younger. Its simply another `equal rights` issue.

Also, since women are most fertile between ages 18 to 25, a delay in the age at marriage could help with population growth rate, as the success of this practice has demonstrated in China. A 25-year-old guy, or example, marrying a 32-year-old woman will have a lesser probability of worsening the population problem.

I know, I know, you don`t have to say it. You the youthful vigilantes of this forum will aptly point out that `getting married` is not a prerequisite for procreation: only unprotected sex will do the trick! Whereas that is quite true, in this day and age, there is more of a de-linkage between sex and procreation than ever was in human history. Those who don`t want children, can still have all the sex they want. And those who may only want children don`t necessarily have to `endure` sex, if such is their inclination. So demographically speaking `getting married` does equate quite nicely with `having children`. (Is that okay with you, Shahbaz?J)

I agree with S. Ahmad in that marriage is a legal and economic arrangement primarily designed for the security and nurturing of a growing family. Were it not for the consideration of children and their legal and economic security, marriage today would have little to offer that one could not otherwise enjoy with a relationship which did not have the seal of the law affixed to it. The only addendum to it is old age companionship, and that was my original point.

Why, some may ask, do you need marriage for old age companionship? Why can`t granny simply date? Well, the answer is that, of course, granny can date all she wants, but it ain`t that easy. Finding compatible companions isn`t a simple affair even at the best of times. It requires a substantial investment of time and energy. As we age, these two commodities (time and energy) are in shorter and shorter supply with each successive birthday. Moreover, we tend to become more and more set in our ways as we age and the range of our choice narrows. It is therefore not as easy for granny to rope in a compatible companion after grandpa kicks the bucket. More than likely she will live out the remaining 12 years by her self and not even bother with the personals in the classified section of Modern Maturity.

…SR

re: Anita Zaidi
A highly informative and concise analysis.
I especially agree with the part that women will get equality, not only in marriage, but in society in general only when they are financially independant. If you look at societies the world over when classes developed and concepts of state, property came about women were left out. ANd you are absolutely right, all this is changing.
Even in terms of commercials, I happen to notice more commercials geared towards independant working women (20 - 40) (single or married ???? can`t really say).
BUt do you think over the years this will change our view of what we see attractive in men and women ? This does kind of go back into the nurture vs nature theory. Once we get positive images of older women, we may start seeing those as desirable. Although from an evolutionary standpoint there seems to be some merit to the body clock argument.

re: Shahbaaz
I enjoy reading your replies. BUt this thing about you coloured your hair grey to look older and stuff......yeh thoraa zyaada ho gayaa yaar. Give it a break. I agree with you. And I am sure a lot of other chowk wallahs do. YOu have successfully exposed and assasinated this ``traditional`` man time and again. But that is not directly the answer to ALL the issues. In this case what you are calling older probably means 30s and is part of a lot of teenage male fantasies. That really isn`t ``older``, at least by what I mean. Honestly how many 50 - 60 year old women have you found attractive ?
However, Harrison Ford, Sean Connery with a leg in the grave get voted sexiest men on earth. While smooth young teenagers keep vying for the latest supermodel`s job. 2 years ago CK had to remove a ``provocative`` ad campaign which featured a 14 year old.
And the burning question, why do women shave their legs, hands, whatever else, while men don`t bother. Our ancestors the apes were hairy males and females.
Also the body clock has not really been broken, for all practical purposes. Yes there is proof that even 60 year old women can have children. But most doctors will advise of increasing risks over the age of 35.
PS do not hit enter when you reah the end of the reply box, just keep typing :-)

regards
RanaRansher

Re: Ms Zaidi

I beg to disagree with your final analysis.
I feel it is fiery rhetoric based on a purely academic or clinical analysis of the situation. .
Marriages, ( and I reiterate for th 1000th time) is about emotional co-dependence & security
, financial co-dependence is a necessary corollary. COnsequently both women & men should strive towards a more educated and consequently a more enligtened institution of marriage. Perpetuating financial independence for women as a cure all is sheer fallacy, - equality in any marriage is an elusive goal and is at best circumstantial. Certainly financial independence gives women a fallback position and consequently makes them more assertive, - but it does not guarantee equality. Secondly Ms Zaidi assumes that the neaderthal mentality is inherently a male genetic flaw. Equality in marriage comes from mutual understanding between the couple based on the needs and requirements of the marriage, it is therefore independent of the financial ability of either party.

Ms Zaidi advocates being single as opposed to being `` in an unequal relationship`` - but how precisely does an ``Mature`` early-twenty-something decide on what equalty is in a pre-marital situation. Do you advocate prolonged courtships or perhaps live-in relationships to test the waters. How exactly do we define what is equal???. It is very ambigious and sends the wrong message to impressionable youth,who equate it with not compromising. ``I am not going to lower my standards, regardless of how unrealistic they maybe``.

consequently what we see in
desi america is that kids particularly girls making independent decisions that need not be the correct ones without the wise counsel of experienced family members. Hey ``It`s my life anyway``.

Secondly I am sure bachelor-hood is all bliss,
there is no emotional rapport, no security of a fellow companion, - no joy of projeny, but hey I dont have to compromise. I have seen from personal family experience, - the emotional, and certainly mental disbalance that bachelorhood entails. And what of the physical aspect of human needs, maybe its open season on physical relationships.....

Your third solution that harminous relationships donot depend on a male bread-winner and a female stay-at-home figure is slightly flawed. Children require maternal support in the early years of their life, - and certaiunly close parental association throughout their childhood years.
Latch-key kids of the 70`s are a poor example of raising children in two-income america. Secondly incomes &/or professions are a means of supporting the family but more often than not have become the avenue for ``pusuit of happiness`` at the expense of the family. Because ofthis you see a backlash from Generation X to the BAby-boomer latch key efect, wherein more women now prefer to stay home atleast during the early years of the child`s development.

Many of the extreme attitudes of completely career-oriented upwardly mobile professsional
women usually come from 1st generation professional women, who having seen domestic inequality in their parent`s household,- somehow equate professional success and financial independence as a self-esteem issue. COnsequently a completely career-centric attitude on life and family. Since the emancipation of desi woman in the professional ranks is a fairly recent phenomenon (as opposed to the Western woman) , - I would assume a corresponding lag in a return to more pragmatic values.

I think this goes beyond all cultures. It has something to do with the way we view men and women. What we see as attractive amongst men and women. Men, even with wrinkles and gray hair or no hair can be sexy. Whereas women look beautiful when they look young, nubile and pubescent. THese are not my views. I am merely commenting on what what we project in our media, advertising, , fahions, etc. In other words the `desirable images` of men and women. TO answer why we wonder about older women with younger women you need to answer why :
- Characters portrayed by Older established (wealthy, independant) men continue to get paired with young near pubescent women in movies all over the world ?
- Why women all over the world (correct me, please) remove unwanted hair, but men just let it all grow. Primates male or female seemed to be equically hairy.
WHy is a woman`s beauty associated with youth.
FOr a man to be attractive it has to be a man. A youthful boy is not really considered attactive by older women. At the other extreme men can age gracefully, and still be considered desirable to younger women with the grey and wrinkles.
ANd I think this has a lot to do with the body clock. I see Darwin in everything. Humans evolve and develop traits that help them procreate, hence survive.

with regards to Bal bacche. IT does not refer to the wife at all. Baalah is a Sanskrit word which means boy (surprise !!). IN Hindi the word is Baal. Bachcha is a Persian word meaning child. Interestingly in Urdu the Hindi grammar applies to Bachcha to make the plural bachche. Anyway, I think the bachche was just included for the rest ie girls.
Alternatively, tHe phrase seems to be just like many such colloquial phrases where a word is repeated twice for emphasis. Garam-Garam, Thik-Thak, such-much.

Important topic but poorly analyzed.

From an evolutionary standpoint, it would appear that marriage for women at a young age would maximize fertility and thus be advantageous to the propagation of species. However, fertility transitions towards smaller family size related to increasing female age at marriage were evidenced in Europe as early as the late 17th century, so it is indeed surprising that the gender gap in age between men and women at the time of marriage still persists universally, albeit it is shrinking slowly as we hit the 21st century (see data given below).

A multiplicity of factors in addition to biological ones are obviously at play. One of the most important, to my mind is that with access to improved health, life expectancy at birth for girls is on the average 7 years more than that of boys. This adds to the supply/demand problem. There are just many more women around than there are men. With the obsession that society now has with looking youthful and radiant, and with men having the luxury of choosing a mate, one would expect them to choose from among the youngest and most beautiful, even excluding biological considerations.

Economic, cultural, and patriarchal factors all act together to accentuate the disparity in age at marriage. From an economic standpoint, women who do not want to earn independent livelihoods prefer to marry men who are financially solvent, and therefore generally older. Lower rates of higher education for women (positively associated with young age at marriage), at least in India and Pakistan are also big factors in early marriage.

Finally society continues to look upon spinsterhood with stigmatization everywhere in the world (unquestionably more so in our part of the world). One only has to look upon parallel words to indicate never-married status in the English language to realize the depth of this stigma. The world ``bachelor`` connotes eligible status - a temporary personal choice is implied - the understanding is that the gentleman in question is a bachelor by choice and can change that status whenever he so wishes. By contrast , the word ``spinster`` implies a woman that no one has found attractive enough to marry - the woman exists in this pitiable unmarried state through no choice of her own, and would (or should)jump to marry the first guy that comes along - the word says. This stigmatization of course creates unbelievable anxiety in the minds of parents of young girls, so that they indoctrinate in the daughters’ minds the importance of early marriage to the first ``suitable`` rishta, in order to avoid this tragic fate.

The good news is that things are changing, even in India and Pakistan towards greater parity in ages at marriage, as well as rising age at marriage.

India’s data from the ‘92-’93 National Family Health Survey show average age of men at marriage as 25, and women 20. This compares to 21.9 for men, and 15.9 for women in 1961. In urban areas, the gender age gap is about 4 years.

Pakistan just had a massive Health and Demographic Survey done, results from which are still in the press. The last survey from 1991 showed that average age for men at marriage is 26.5, and that of women 21.7. This compares to 23.3 for men, and 16.7 for women in 1961 (census data). Not surprisingly, given longer life expectancy for women, and younger age at marriage, more than half of all Pakistani women are widowed by age 65.

Now of course, it is possible to interpret the rising age at marriage for both men and women as being driven by Malthusian forces - but the positive correlation with education and delayed marriage argues otherwise.

In the final analysis, I continue to hold to the view that women must strive towards economic independence, and that independent women should prefer to remain unmarried rather than compromise on principles of equality in marriage. Additionally, women should get away from the notion that they have to marry someone more ``qualified`` and older than them, thus perpetuating patriarchy, and doing themselves an enormous disservice. Thankfully, harmonious home life need no longer be based on a male breadwinner, and a female stay-at-home figure.

anita

I tend to agree that there is a gender bias wrt relationships based on age. But age here is a mere synonym for status & power, - Catherine the Great ( Tsarina of the Russias ) is supposed to have had boys as young as 16, Elizabeth Tudor, Elisabeth( Empress of all Russia), Maria Teresa ( The Hapsburgs) - even the bible talks of the Pharoah`s wife and Joseph, history is replete with examples of women taking younger men as partners, and I think that has more do with power than with gender, and women have limited power in traditional patriarchial societies.

As for the reference ``baccha`` or ``kid`` - I think that is is out of context, - I agree it is usually referred to the women, because the women are usually younger. And contrary to the author`s opinion it is not an eastern tradition. In Casblanca ( the movie) Humphrey Bogart said these
immortal lines to Ingrid Bergmann ``Here`s for looking at you kid`` before he drank his burboun.


Also physiological facts are hard to deny ( baring cosmetic surgery and makeup), men do age more gracefully than women, - whether it is a source of humor, one needs to inquire from George Bush.

Part of the reason might be social conditioning, it hard to deny that men that men go after the
physical person wheras women are conditioned to go after persona ( wealth status etc ....) and dont tell me this is bull, - being in matrimonial circumstances, as well with friends, women are generally far more impressed with the trappings of success - whether eastern or western conditioning.

Consequently since sucess comes at a later age and
physical beauty diminishes with age you find corresponding differences to match gender tastes.

The problems lies not with society but in our decision making, if we decide our match public perception rather than personal preferences, then
there is a flaw in decision making. Unfortunately desi`s in general are far too concious of public opinion in private affairs. ANd shall I dare say wommen in general are for more conscious of this than their male counterparts. Cliches such as `` I wanna marry a man to impress my friends`` are so common that sometines it defies logic. Part of the reasoning has to with a woman`s status in society
is based on her ability to find the right spouse.
Now I am not talking about Pakistan and subdued Pakistani women, - am referring to the liberated
US educated ( mostly ABCD`s & some FOB`s) who want their spouses to be more accomplished than themselves, consequently one finds physicans looking for physicans, engineers for engineers, lawyers for lawyers etc...., something quite unique in the desi landscape and representative of the deeply engendered caste system prevlant in desi society. Consequently we have a situation where thirty-something single professional desi women abound looking for 35 + single desi ( shareef) men. As if such a thing exists.

I tend to agree that our culture is biased, but part of the problem is that matchmaking is perpetually a female dominated profession, and as long as Ammis have a penchant for finding virginal
21 yr old even for their over the hill 35 yr old
son, then the men go along.... LOL

According to the recent issue of P.O.V. (Point Of View) magazine- One reason men age gracefully is because they (usually) shave every morning- causing dead skin cells to be replaced by new living ones every day.

So if women were exercising and shaving (threading, waxing) instead of coating their faces with chemicals every morning than perhaps we would not find matrimonials between older women and younger men much to WOW about.