There is an interesting discussion going on in Open Thread #404, which is a most fitting number for the title of this post. The starting point was a trailer of a movie by the highly subversive production company A24. In an upcoming movie, they push the idea of geriatric women being sexual objects for young, healthy men. Thus, this is an utter perversion of the female dating strategy of being young and attractive, and willing to consider a guy double their age. Normally, people assume that sexual attraction primarily goes in one direction, i.e. from the old, successful man to the young woman who is trading looks for money. This is not enough for A24. They need to show a young man who gets aroused by a woman who looks so old that you wonder from which grave she dug herself out of.
As our hostile elites have pushed women from the kitchen into the workplace, plenty of women nowadays make their own money. This money is mostly spent on frivolous consumption, so it raises GDP, and because these women have fewer children, it is a clear win for the elites. There is the trend that women even do better than men in the workplace. This is fueled by bullshit jobs that only exist because there is so much excess money sloshing around in the system. Yet, the effect is clear: as long as clown world keeps going, women will keep making more money changing font sizes in PowerPoint slide decks than a men working in the HVAC trade.
As a consequence of women making more money than they used to, and possibly even more than some men, an obvious question is whether we can truly change the roles of the sexes. In other words, would it be possible for men to mooch of women, just like many women have, historically, mooched off men? The simply answer is that this is possible in principle, and in the short term, but it is not sustainable in the long term as both the man and the woman want a different arrangement instead.
The biggest obstacle towards mooching off a woman is that you need to find one to mooch off. Here, I can speak from experience. When I spent my days sleeping in, partying late, and having a lot of fun with women, I met a few who seemed strangely unperturbed by my lack of interest in looking for a day job. I got a few unexpected offers, like a woman asking if I wanted to move in with her, despite barely knowing her, and there were a few women who paid for dinners as they realized that I may stretch my finances a bit too thin if I were to pay for it. If a woman supports you financially, to whatever extent, she wants a payoff at some point, however. She will not just let you idle your days away at home. I even had the occasional friend with benefits who made an attempt to turn me into a productive member of society. One woman showed up at my place with printouts of job ads, wanting to go through them together with me. Another one was adamant I should “reset” my life by doing a business degree. Unsurprisingly, she had a business degree herself.
In the end, women want to be taken care of. This is best expressed in the stereotypical yet true saying that your money is “our money” but her money remains hers. This is even the case when both earn comparable amounts of money. The default assumption, which includes economically empowered women, is that everything she earns is just a bonus. I have noticed that in supposedly equal relationships there are significant imbalance as well. You can encounter mind-bending mental gymnastics on how to split rent, for instance. It is not a 50/50 split because you earn more, albeit you may actually use less than half the available space. Assuming you make 50% more than she does, implying a 60/40 split, she may insist that you pay 70 or 80% of the rent. The reasoning will be along the lines of you making more, thus you would be much more able to afford to pay more. It simply stings less for you than for her.
A strategy some women pursue in order to find a successful partner is to try hard to get into a competitive industry and put in the hours while maximizing their visibility in the organization if not the industry. This only lasts until they have found someone. Then they will normally quickly reduce their hours, starting with 80%. She wants to take Wednesday off because work is so demanding. Before you know it, she will only work 50%. Her arguments in such situations center around the fact that the guy earns more, so if her comparatively low salary goes away, it should not matter, you misogynist! Obviously, everything she makes she will mostly keep for herself anyway, so in the end, the guy will more or less pay for everything.
I do not think that I seriously need to discuss the case of a young guy deliberately going for an old hag. I am not even sure that gerontophilia even exists. There is granny porn but the audience is probably about as limited as the audience for black-on-white porn. It gets made in order to poison your mind and if there are some confused men who somehow develop sexual attraction for older women, it plays into the elite agenda of population reduction. I believe this is why such garbage is available for free online.
A young woman getting involved with an older guy has it easy. She only has to lie there. The guy will get hard and have no problem pounding her. Maybe she will not enjoy it as much as getting railed by Chad, but this is not a problem. If you doubt that, then ask yourself how prostitutes have been able to do their job since the dawn of time. Women do not need to be sexually attracted to a guy in order to have sex with him. It is enough if the guy is. You cannot reverse the roles here. A young guy will not be sexually attracted to an old woman. Recall that the trade is resources versus fertility. The woman essentially cashes in her looks. She gets the resources, and the guy gets to enjoy her youth and beauty. Thus, both sides are happy. The opposite case does not work at all. His side of the equation is basically empty: he does not give up resources but he also does not get to enjoy youth and beauty because elderly women are no longer fertile and thus they are no longer attractive. She cannot get kids out of such an arrangement either, so at best a well-off older woman could get, if she found a young guy in dire need of money, is some kind of perverse satisfaction that she can pretend to play the role of the man in the relationship.
Yeah, I definitely agree with you on the motivation of these women. I also think that these women have diluted themselves into thinking that these young men find them sexy. Especially if the women were attractive in their youth. And especially if these guys 20 years their junior are handsome dudes. They feel validated as if they still “got it.”
Oh, and am I the only one that didn’t recognize Nicole Kidman at first?
I did not recognize her either, and even with you telling me that this is her, I have a hard time believing it. She really left no wall standing. It is crazy that she went from Eyes Wide Shut (1999), in which she still looks quite attractive, to this. I wonder if she has a history of drug abuse.
Nah, I think you are exaggerating a bit this time. The woman is 57, she just looks her age. Probably a bit better than most of her age-peers (enough so that a few of the men who lusted after her during her prime would hit that), though it helps of course that she’s thin, has had some dye-job and some other “jobs” on her face. I expected to see some kind of monstrosity in that trailer, like present-day Madonna.
BTW, gigolos exist, some pro but mostly amateur. Some guys have weird sex drives where they’d rather fuck anything that moves (grannies, beasts, etc.) than jerking one off. Some use that “power” to their advantage, though of course any old woman is deluding herself if she thinks that he isn’t either a fetishist freak or a mooch who just wants some new Jordan sneakers or something.
If we were talking about a random woman, I would agree, but the woman in question is Nicole Kidman. Just days ago I had watched footage of Eyes Wide Shut, which led to me writing an article about money and the middle class. In Eyes Wide Shut, she is arguably slightly past her prime but still very attractive. In contrast, at 57 she is not highly attractive for a 57-year-old. Her looks have declined disproportionately. Then again, she started at a very high level.
A lot of white women age worse than minority women because of an obsession with “sun worship” (i.e. spending way too much time in the sun). Our white skin is the most sensitive to the sun, and they tend to spend more time in it than minority women. I don’t know for sure if that’s what Kidman did, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
I’ve seen this among white women I know in real life. Cute girls in high school, in their 30s they’re already looking wrinkled and worn, and in their 40s they’re not far from looking like hags. š
Kidman also appears to have had excessive amounts of plastic surgery, which tends to make people look a lot worse.
An additional issue is that in Western countries every few years it is fashionable to have a tan, causing women to flock to the solarium. They prance around in their tanned bodies in their teens and early twenties, yet a few years later they seem to have aged ten years more than their chronological age might indicate. It is odd that the public does not get informed of this. After all, the elites look out for us otherwise, for instance by advising us to get vaxxed, not eat meat, and shed our inherent racism. Why is excessive damage to the skin of our women not a problem?
I used to work in east San Diego county, which has a very high white population. I noticed that they also had a significant amount of attractive teenage girls. It was frustrating because very few 20 something hotties. I think its for a number of reasons,
not least amongst them sun exposure. Very hot and dry, because of how deep into the desert it is compared to the rest of the county.