|
hardbodysub -> RE: Are you 'into' older men? (11/2/2009 8:05:02 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: eyesopened
The phrase that "age is just a number" doesn't wash in my opinion. Insurance actuaries and the law of large numbers suggest that we can predict certain things based on age. It's why car insurance is more expensive for the young male and health insurance more expesive for the aged.
Time and Gravity are cruel Masters who must be obeyed. It is the folly of youth to believe they can twart the passing of time by their own actions and force of will. You cannot predict now whether or not you will be attractive into your 50's based on physical attributes or even having a skilled surgeon on retainer. Joan Rivers tried that and ended up a cartoon.
What matters is this: We are all equal in only one regard and that is that we have all been given 24 hours in each day. What we do with this is the imporant thing. Spending 3 days and 6 pages worrying about the question "Are your into older men?" seems like a poor investment in time.
As Iron Bear so wonderfully pointed out is that some people really take full advantage of living in each of the 24 hours given when many use those hours in meaningless pursuits. Therefore a 20 year old CAN be more experienced and better balanced than a 50 year old.
At the end of the day, 5 years from now, 15 years from now, how much will the question "Are you into older men?" really matter?
On one hand you say "age is just a number" doesn't wash, and on the other hand you give an example that implies that it does. I actually think we are actually in agreement, although it's a little hard to see. In reality, age is a useful predictor in some cases, but not in others.
Actuarial and statistical science predict outcomes by calculating the probabilitiy of certain things. The fact that the probability is dependent on the use of large numbers means that it's useful in the aggregate, but not nearly as useful with small numbers of people, let alone one individual. Unfortunately, individuals are routinely discriminated against, using the logic that applies to large numbers.
I think that when people say "age is just a number", they don't really mean that it's completely irrelevant. I think what they really mean is that with any specific individual, you can't predict a lot of things based on age alone. The effects of age on appearance, experience, wisdom, etc., can vary widely by individual. As you noted, "a 20 year old CAN be more experienced and better balanced than a 50 year old."
In regard to the "folly of youth", the Joan Rivers' example suggests that folly is not just for the young.
|
|
|
|
