The benefits of marrying in your mid-to-late 20s http://t.co/KVzyPYDHsrFrom Twitter, an objection.
— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) February 28, 2015
This article reeks of an implicit, outdated, sexist values framework regarding what makes a worthwhile life. @washingtonpost @WilcoxNMPFrom a UK newspaper, a response from a lady involved in the online dating scene.
— Samten Chuwo (@samtenchuwo) February 28, 2015
It’s been a week of gloomy thoughts about what one applicant called “the packaging”. In fact, he wasn’t an applicant. He wrote specifically to tell me he wasn’t. “It’s a shame I don’t fancy you,” he said, “because otherwise you tick all the boxes.” Another said I sounded nice, but added: “Though unfortunately I have stringent physical criteria.”Biology is sexist and favors marriage in your 20s.
There seems to be a gender imbalance, vis-a-vis the packaging thing. All the women I know are tolerant of middle age showing itself in a chap. We quite like a late flowering, in fact: the silvering, the smile lines, the coming of bodily sturdiness. We read these as signs that life has been lived and enjoyed. We read them as indicators of substance, of being substantial. In general, men don’t seem to grant us the same courtesy, at least not the men I meet online. They are highly focused on the packaging. It’s disheartening.