Re:The Further Text Adventures of Scott Adams
by monocasa on Wednesday November 24, 2021 @12:41PM
(#29332710)
It says that guys get off to the idea of young women, but for long term commitments want someone closer to their age as well, even if that person is outside of fertility. That backs up what I'm saying.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Further Text Adventures of Scott Adams
by stickfigure on Wednesday November 24, 2021 @01:20PM
(#29333234)
There's something odd about an abstract that says "...females preferred..." instead of "...the majority of females preferred...".
By that same standard, humans are heterosexual, monogamous, and date within their own skin color. And apparently, anyone who deviates from that is "creepy".
Re:The Further Text Adventures of Scott Adams
by Zababa on Wednesday November 24, 2021 @01:36PM
(#29333463)
I don't think it validates what you're saying. You're saying it's creepy, while the study says it's natural if the goal is not a long term commitments. Or is your view that anything that's not a long term commitment is creepy?
Re:The Further Text Adventures of Scott Adams
by monocasa on Wednesday November 24, 2021 @01:45PM
(#29333574)
A) We're discussing a marriage
B) If you read the study and not just the abstract, it puts the general lowest age for 60yo men at around 45 for purely sexual fantasy partners. A 25yo is wayyyyy outside that bounds.
Re:The Further Text Adventures of Scott Adams
by Zababa on Wednesday November 24, 2021 @01:58PM
(#29333721)
> If you read the study and not just the abstract
I'd have to purchase the PDF for that.
> it puts the general lowest age for 60yo men at around 45 for purely sexual fantasy partners
I find it really really high and hard to believe. I'm not sure about the methodology employed, but if people can just lie, I wouldn't trust the results of that study.