Screwed

In 2014, fifty-three-year-old George Clooney married Amal Alamuddin, a lawyer in her midthirties. The day after the news broke, I sat with my coffee, reading a column by a journalist in her fifties who considered the relationship proof of a mid-life crisis, an ugly reality that can strike indiscriminately and leaves no aging wife safe in her marriage. As I came across similar stories, I couldn’t help wondering whether the phenomenon is really as widespread as they say. I am, after all, about the same age as Amal Clooney. If the phenomenon is real, that means many women under thirty-five are dating men ten, fifteen, even twenty years their senior. So where are all the single men my age hiding?

Statistically speaking, there should be a single man out there for every single heterosexual woman — after all, the population is fairly evenly split between the genders.

If men in their fifties prefer to date younger women, then it follows that there are fewer younger women available. Logically, this should create an untapped pool of single young men who are potential partners for the older women. If this is the case, then why do we often hear about the former situation (older men with younger women) but rarely the latter (older women with younger men)?

Is the older man + younger woman combination really so common? And if the answer is yes, wouldn’t it invariably lead to young men and older women coupling up?

Enter the “cougar”: if we’re talking about courtship, age gaps, and the hunt, we can’t gloss over this contemporary female archetype.

Throughout history, women have been expected to abandon their sex drive as they aged, simply because it was believed that men lost interest in them. A woman was supposed to pass without protest from spring blossom to fading bloom.

Until recently, this shift manifested with motherhood. A woman would transition from eligible maiden, to bride, to mother. And once the kids arrived, the role of mother replaced that of sexual being and object of desire.¹ Women were expected to steer their lives according to this trajectory. First, devote body and soul to securing a husband; once this has been achieved, raise their children with the same utter devotion. A mother was not expected to attract men once she had settled down: her life had taken a new direction, one that desexualized her.

In today’s world, with sexuality being trivialized and multinational corporations constantly hunting for new markets, the situation has changed. Mothers are no longer encouraged to renounce their sex appeal. On the contrary, marketing firms do everything they can to sell women products designed to keep them looking young. The imperative to appear youthful ensures that these products (hair dyes, push-up bras, makeup, anti-aging creams, plastic surgery, trendy clothing, etc.) are in constant demand.

This is partly why becoming a mother no longer stands in the way of a woman’s sexualization. And this has given rise to two new cultural phenomena: the cougar and the MILF.

The MILF (Mother I’d Like to Fuck) and the cougar are two distinct concepts. A MILF is a woman who is objectified. A man’s desire is central to the expression: the man is the subject, the “I,” who is acting on the object. The sex drive of the mother in question is not part of the equation.

But while the MILF complies with the stereotype of the passive woman, the concept of the cougar is quite revolutionary.

The cougar is a subject who desires; her sex drive is central to the expression defining her. The image of the “cougar” suggests a predatory relationship. The cougar is no prey; she is a huntress.

But even so, does the cougar undermine the cumshot principle? This question deserves a closer look.

The cougar is no longer a spring blossom, but nor is she necessarily a mother. The word simply refers to a woman who is attracted to men significantly younger than she is.

The term entered popular culture around the turn of the millennium to describe celebrities like Demi Moore or Madonna. But New Zealand researchers Zoe Lawton and Paul Callister have traced the expression’s origin to Canada, in the 1980s.² According to their research, the Vancouver Canucks, a professional hockey team, coined the term to refer to older single women who attended games in the hopes of sleeping with attractive young players. The expression was then picked up by columnist Valerie Gibson of the Toronto Sun in 2001. The following year, Gibson published a book providing tips for older women who want to date younger men. In it, she related her own experiences with men ten to twenty years her junior.

The age difference in Gibson’s case is significant, but it isn’t always so for cougars. A woman may be called a cougar even if she is only a few years older than her partner. In fact, the unusual nature of any relationship involving an older woman and a younger man is quickly remarked on — and amplified. Once, when I was twenty-nine and dating a twenty-five-year-old, an acquaintance compared our “age difference” to that of her own relationship: she was thirty, her partner fifty.

Yet in our culture, men can easily be older than their partner without raising any eyebrows. People may call attention to a large age gap, but not systematically and with less intensity. Why is that?

The older man/younger woman liaison is very common in fiction. Consider the famous Hollywood Age Gap, that all-too-common practice within the entertainment industry of pairing older male actors with much younger female partners.

This is only a handful of examples among countless. Note that we don’t call men in these movies “pumas” (a little-used term for men who pursue younger women³).

In 2015, Maggie Gyllenhaal made the shocking revelation in an interview that Hollywood had deemed her “too old” to play the love interest of a fifty-five-year-old man. She was thirty-seven at the time.

Today, the average age gap between on-screen partners is four and a half years (men are, of course, older).⁴ According to data gathered by the website GraphJoy, which charted age differences during the careers of twenty of Hollywood’s top actors, male celebrities begin to be cast opposite much younger actresses once they reach thirty-five. While they age progressively onscreen, their romantic partners do not.⁵

Now that we have a clearer picture of the phenomenon, it’s worth exploring whether the “cougar” is more myth than reality.

Reuters, for one, has concluded that it is largely myth. In a release that was later picked up by various other media outlets, the news agency referenced a University of Wales Institute study from 2010, which discovered that despite embracing this new female figure in popular culture, women still prefer older partners and men continue to seek younger women.⁶

The study did not focus on the existence of the cougar, per se, but examined gender preferences internationally, across fourteen countries. It found that the cougar phenomenon is real, but relatively marginal. In fact, the study only confirmed what statistics already showed: we tend to form relationships in which the man is older than the woman.

Lawton and Callister, however, took a closer look at the cougar phenomenon. They observed that over a twenty-year period (1986–2006), the proportion of fifty-year-old women with a partner at least five years their junior jumped from 4 percent to 7 percent.

Interestingly, the proportion of fifty-year-old men in a relationship with a woman at least five years younger dropped from 35 percent to 31 percent over the same period.

These results were confirmed when the researchers compared their findings against statistics from the United States. Between 1960 and 2007, the proportion of marriages in which the man is at least five years older than his partner dropped from one-third to one-quarter. As for couples in which the woman is older, the percentage increased from 4 percent to 6 percent.

While these may be small fluctuations, the statistics do reflect real changes. Most age gaps still reflect a tendency to favour pumas, although the number of cougars has risen slightly.

The researchers noted, however, that their statistics describe only couples in long-term relationships; they did not look at dating or one-night stands, cases in which the cougar phenomenon is doubtless more prevalent.

The fact remains that the older woman/younger man model seems less natural to us. This is confirmed on dating sites like OkCupid, where women of all ages seek out men their age or older, while men over thirty continue to prefer women in their early twenties.⁷

Pornography offers a clear illustration of men’s obsession with younger women. One of the most popular categories — if not the most popular, according to available data — is “teen” porn, where videos portray teen girls, not teen boys. In this case, teen really means teen girls. Actresses are required to be of legal age to perform on-screen, but they also are required to look young enough to pass for an adolescent. Just think of how the “sexy schoolgirl uniform” trope eroticizes teen girls.

All kinds of explanations grounded in biology have been used in the past to present this sexual preference as the natural order of things. Advocates have claimed that men are attracted to younger women due to “reproductive instincts.” Because younger women are more fertile, they naturally are more sought after.

And since men remain fertile throughout most of their life, their age does not pose an issue for women from a reproductive standpoint. On the surface, it all seems to make sense.

First, a progressive decline in women’s sex appeal once they hit their midtwenties is not in our best reproductive interests. While fertility does begin to decline around this age, overlooking these women would mean losing out on innumerable chances for procreation.

Many women can conceive until they hit menopause, which occurs at fifty-one, on average. A decline in fertility does not mean that women over thirty become infertile overnight.

We tend to exaggerate the drop in women’s fertility rates by implying the threat strikes early and hard. After reading numerous cautionary articles, I, too, long held the belief that when a woman reached her midtwenties, it was the beginning of the end. But according to a 2004 study, 82 percent of women between thirty-five and thirty-nine will get pregnant within a year of having regular sex. In another study, published in 2013, 78 percent of women in this age range conceived within the year, compared to 84 percent for women twenty to thirty-four years old. It appears, then, that the decline in fertility is not nearly as abrupt as many would have us believe. Women don’t experience a significant drop in fertility until their forties, and even then a notable percentage are still able to conceive at that point.⁸ Women who have not hit menopause are still very much within “child-bearing age.”

Another argument focuses on the dangers associated with late child-bearing — and the risks are real. According to one UK study, the risk of Down syndrome climbs to one in eighty-five pregnancies for women over forty.⁹ But is that number actually so high? Only if you look at it in terms of an optimal “natural” pregnancy.

To be fair, we must consider that scientists have also recognized the father’s age as a risk factor for Down syndrome — one that contributes to anywhere from 11 to 50 percent of cases, studies show.¹⁰ But the general public often fails to realize the risk related to the father’s age.

There are also risks associated with adolescent births. According to the World Health Organization, “complications from pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death among girls aged 15–19 years globally.” From a reproductive standpoint, this is not advantageous. In addition, babies born to adolescent mothers are at greater risk of “having low birth weight with long-term potential side effects.”¹¹ All this, and yet the fantasy of the teenage girl continues to burn brightly.

The chief logical flaw with the argument that men are biologically programmed to be attracted to very young women, however, lies elsewhere. Symbols of beauty and femininity that have appealed to men for many decades in the West signify extreme youth, and have nothing whatsoever to do with women’s fertility — on the contrary.

In the West, only a preference for full breasts breaks with this tendency. Barring that, it’s clear that most physical attributes we consider to be sexy evoke childhood: i.e., a period when women are not yet fertile.

What we value in terms of sexual attractiveness, then, does not correspond with optimizing reproduction. As a result, we are forced, as a culture, to create a compromise: we demand that women of child-bearing age resemble infertile prepubescent girls to attract men.

The fertility argument as an explanation of our collective attraction for young women weakens even more when we consider that the signs proving a woman IS fertile are NOT seen as erotic.

The “evolutionists” love drawing connections between women’s physiques, their fertility, and men’s preferences. Yet there are visible and unambiguous signs of fertility that these experts curiously overlook: traces of a past pregnancy. Stretch marks, sagging breasts, enlarged and darkened nipples, weight gain, and a soft belly are all signs a woman has already had a child and is therefore … fertile! A man who wants to reproduce with a woman who has never given birth is taking his chances — she may prove infertile — but a woman who has already had a child has undeniably demonstrated her capacity in this department.

So why is it that the signs of a previous pregnancy aren’t considered the highest draw in terms of sex appeal? Why are they instead seen as embarrassing and ugly? We go so far as to expect mothers to erase all physical vestiges of pregnancy in order to appeal to men.

If women’s fertility really had a decisive impact on men’s libido, then society would value physical signs of previous pregnancies. But that’s not the case.

For all these reasons, using fertility to explain men’s “natural” attraction to younger women is a flawed argument. My point is not that fertility is irrelevant or that it isn’t one variable in the equation. But I do believe it is not a sufficient explanation: it relies on too many paradoxes.

Now let’s focus on women. Why do they prefer men their own age or older, regardless of how old they are?

We know that in theory, men, unlike women, can stay fertile their whole life. But the fertility of older men doesn’t explain why they win out over younger men in terms of sexual attraction. Enter the explanation of man as provider during the Stone Age.

SPERM IS CHEAP

We tend to buy into different theories without considering their impact because we’re drawn to ideas that validate our existing understanding of sexuality. In this respect, Bateman’s principle offers a compelling argument. The theory essentially posits that because men produce millions of sperm with each ejaculation (in comparison to women, who produce just one egg per month), it isn’t advantageous for them to limit their sexual attentions to one partner.¹² This explains why they have a natural tendency to womanize, to avoid checking their libido, while women tend to be more calculating when selecting potential partners before mating.

What this theory also (dubiously) implies is that men should have no reason to prefer any particular type of woman. It would be in their best interest to seize every opportunity to mate indiscriminately, with all sorts of women, to maximize their chances of reproduction. With no risk of getting pregnant, they have nothing to lose!

In other words: if a man’s only goal is to procreate, then he should have no reason (biologically speaking) to be picky. Regardless of whether a woman is at the peak of her fertility or nearing the end of it, it’s worth a shot if there’s a possibility to reproduce.

Given this, responsibility for sex selection would not fall to philandering and indiscriminate men, but to fussier women.

Bateman’s principle isn’t watertight. However, note that while we love invoking the first part of the theory, which argues for men’s sexual liberation and aims to free them from the “constraints” of monogamy, we tend to neglect the second part, which suggests that men should have no preferences for a woman’s physique and age.

Here’s how it goes: women are attracted to men who can provide for them. In prehistoric times, when we presume our ancestors were monogamous, women would have wanted a partner capable of supplying them and their future children with material resources. The division of labour dictated the man would go out in search of these resources while the woman took care of the children. There’s no need to dwell on this model, which was the dominant ideology for centuries and still remains in currency to some extent. Given this context, however, a preference for an older man makes sense: older men were likely to have accumulated more resources. Partnering with an older man was advantageous because any future offspring would have a greater chance of survival.

However, the accumulation of goods and resources implies a structured, sedentary life that did not exist in primitive nomadic societies. This is an important distinction, since this model reflects a collective choice, a deliberate way of organizing society that is not rooted in any biological explanation. An attraction toward older men only makes sense rationally (from a reproductive standpoint) when the accumulation of resources becomes possible — and when it is men who accumulate them.

If we assume that women sought out monogamy during this “state of nature” or Stone Age, it would have been counterintuitive for them to reject younger men who were stronger and faster. Younger men had the best reflexes and were the most capable. They had better chances of bringing home fresh meat, ensuring the safety and comfort of the family, and fending off other males. In a primitive world, young men are the best providers.

Women, monogamous or not, will always have a vested interest in coupling with a powerful young man rather than an older one whose abilities are waning.

We rarely talk about it, but men are in their peak physical form between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five. Once they hit twenty-five, their abilities begin to decline.¹³ By that logic, women should express a strong preference for men under twenty-five throughout their life. A man of thirty, forty, or fifty will never be as strong or resilient, his reflexes will never be as sharp, as a man in his twenties. The younger man is the more competent. He’s the one who will be capable of bringing back the biggest mammoth for dinner.

From an evolutionary or biological perspective, there is no reason women should stop being “instinctively” attracted to young men as they age — which is the case we see with men.

We like to claim that men “age better” than women do, from a physical perspective. This idea is utterly absurd. Greying hair, baldness, wrinkles, and weight gain are all clear signs of aging that affect men and announce a decline in their physical prowess. Yet men don’t seem to want to hide or mitigate them as much as women do.

Our cultural response to signs of aging in modern societies with an accumulation of resources differs drastically according to gender. These changes aren’t necessarily considered negative when it comes to men. We associate older men with prestige, expertise, and credibility. In terms of sex appeal, a very concrete physical decline is compensated for by improved social status.

As we have already seen, popular belief holds that men don’t experience fertility problems until late in life, and that a man’s sperm quality declines somewhere around the age of sixty. But this is not true: the decline begins well before then, and it affects men’s chances of reproduction. Men experience a gradual loss of testosterone beginning at around thirty. This hormone affects the production of quality sperm, as the urologist Harry Fisch explained to the New York Times.¹⁴ Other researchers place this decline earlier, beginning in the early twenties.

On average, a twenty-five-year-old man will impregnate his partner after four and a half months of unprotected sex, while it takes men over forty nearly two years in similar conditions, according to researcher Karin Hammarberg.¹⁵ The risk of miscarriage also doubles for men over forty-five.

And as I mentioned earlier, fetal health risks are also associated with fathers of advanced age, not just with mothers of advanced age.

Globally, a man’s sexual abilities begin to drop off after age twenty: from then on, his sex drive will gradually decrease and the refractory period (recovery time needed between orgasms) will increase, until he eventually experiences erectile difficulties.¹⁶ Even if men continue to produce sperm as they age, it loses potency and becomes more difficult to obtain.

Men, just like women, lose their sexual “relevance” from a reproductive standpoint as they age.

If men’s clear preference for women under twenty-five were due to a biological predisposition to maximize their reproductive power, the same should go for women. A younger partner is more advantageous for them, too — on all fronts.

And so, the question remains: why do men show a marked preference for youth when it comes to sex, while on the whole women do not seem attracted to younger men? Why is the cougar phenomenon not more widespread in our culture? Why are childlike features (signs of pre-fertility) considered sexy in a woman? And why aren’t signs of a past pregnancy considered sexy?

If our cultural biases encourage men to prefer youthful partners, it is in part because youth is a mark of submission. With maturity comes authority, and our patriarchal society promotes the idea of a heterosexual couple made up of a dominant male and a dominated female. The sexual roles during courtship and seduction described in the first chapter apply equally here: it’s all part of the established order of things.

This observation leads me to a curious development in the rather overused archetype of the cougar.

As part of my work on TV,¹⁷ I met with Valerie Gibson, the Canadian responsible for popularizing the term “cougar.” During our interview, she acknowledged that while the concept initially referred to a mature woman in “hunting” mode, this is no longer the case. Gibson has observed a change in recent decades: today’s young men are more likely to chase older women, who no longer need to actively seduce. Once again, women wind up being the prey.

What’s more, “cougars” in relationships rarely correspond with our image of the rich and powerful woman. I also met with Milaine Alarie, a doctoral student at McGill University who is researching such couples. Her findings suggest that the wealthier a woman is, the less likely she is to date a younger man. Alarie also confirms what Gibson has observed: in couples where an age gap exists, it is frequently the younger men who chase the older women.

Given this reality, we have to ask ourselves: does the older woman/younger man model reflect a true revolution in the hunter/prey dynamic — or does it merely reproduce it?

Either way, a woman who is attracted to younger partners defies the classic heterosexual model. A cougar defies the status quo by refusing to sacrifice a desire for men at their physical and sexual peak, and refusing to submit to an older male. It isn’t easy to break with sexual conventions; it’s easier to say that only men are “naturally” attracted to youth.

Our culture, which legally infantilized women by placing them under the tutelage of men for centuries, continues to support a similar but informal guardianship, through the authority granted by age in heterosexual couples.

We like to think that love has no age — that it is blind. But the fact remains that these trends are observable, and that age generally comes with more financial stability, greater prestige, and a broader grasp of knowledge and culture. All these confer power to the older party in a social interaction. And when tradition dictates that men are always the older person in the relationship, a pretty clear pattern emerges.

But that isn’t all. There is another reason why men — and often women — find the idea of a very young woman intensely attractive. And that brings us to examine another effect of the cumshot principle.

2

Cougars and Nymphets: Glorifying the Younger Woman

Cougars and Nymphets:
Glorifying the Younger Woman