[speakeasy]

I know some guys here are toward the younger side and some toward the older so there will be a diversity of opinions.

I'm 35 and I find the idea age for a girl to be 27. For me that's the sweet spot between looks/physique and being mature enough to be able to connect with. I'm speaking from an American-centric view. Women in other countries may be more mature at a younger age.

[Timoteo]

I think the formula of half your age plus 7 years is a good starting point. You can scale up or down a couple of years depending on your particular tastes...

[Cincinnatus]

(04-14-2012 11:24 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  

I think the formula of half your age plus 7 years is a good starting point.

I'm in my mid-twenties. Current girlfriend fits this formula. I dig it.

[Excelsior]

Generally, the prime lasts from 16-27. In terms of raw appeal, that is the general range I favor.

When taking all things into account (maturity, compatibility, etc) and going beyond just looks, the ideal would appear to be at the tail end of this physical prime-25 to 28 or so. One could call this the "sweet spot".

At this point, a woman is old enough to have been done with college and built up a little life experience (traveled if she wanted to, held a job if she desired it, embarked on a career and decided what her long term idea would be with it, etc), but still young enough to be near peak physical attractiveness. It is a win-win. Older men looking for younger wives are best served targeting this demographic-any younger and they're just too immature, any older and there's just too much mileage (bad news if you're planning on several kids, less so if you're not). This is the "goldilocks" range.

As speakeasy said, this is a very American way of looking at things. This "Goldilocks" raqnge probably occurs much earlier in other places, where it is not common for one to remain a cultural adolescent well into their late 20's and where youth receive more "mature" responsibilities (alcohol, sex, etc) much earlier on. For American purposes, however, this fits well enough.

[teh_skeeze]

Ages of the girls I've slept with over the last 4 years (keep in mind I had a 3 year relationship)

17-20, 17, 17, 22, 18, 34, 17.

I think you get the point.

[villageindian]

Agreed.

On a lighter note, I have read the Bro Code book and even it seems to promote this formula. Go figure!

(04-14-2012 11:24 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  

I think the formula of half your age plus 7 years is a good starting point. You can scale up or down a couple of years depending on your particular tastes...

[teh_skeeze]

How does that formula limit someone like me (29) from nailing a nice piece of high school junior (16-17). The only thing that truly limits it is good parenting.

[Excelsior]

(04-15-2012 01:54 AM)teh_skeeze Wrote:  

How does that formula limit someone like me (29) from nailing a nice piece of high school junior (16-17). The only thing that truly limits it is good parenting.

The formula is by its nature fairly arbitrary and largely tailored to suit American dating norms and the age gaps tolerated by said norms. It is a rough guide, nothing more. There are plenty of situations in which it can appropriately be violated, even here in the US (ex: plenty of 50 year olds get with women under 32).

[teh_skeeze]

I'm aware of that. I just think it's silly that a good portion of men hold that shit as gospel. I laugh to think that there's a dude out there just one year older than me that won't bang a 20 year old because 15+7=22.

Like running bear says: In China, too young is just a name.

[Excelsior]

(04-15-2012 02:10 AM)teh_skeeze Wrote:  

I'm aware of that. I just think it's silly that a good portion of men hold that shit as gospel. I laugh to think that there's a dude out there just one year older than me that won't bang a 20 year old because 15+7=22.

Like running bear says: In China, too young is just a name.

Eh, just treat it like a positive. That's just one less guy for you to compete with. If he wants to write off a perfectly attractive potential partner on the basis of some arbitrary formula, then that's his loss. He is just showing that he's simply too limited personally (weak, scared, or what have you) to transcend such meaningless boundaries.

Sometimes you just have to let the Darwinian mechanics of the world work their magic.

[Riker]

(04-15-2012 12:28 AM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

Generally, the prime lasts from 16-27. In terms of raw appeal, that is the general range I favor.

When taking all things into account (maturity, compatibility, etc) and going beyond just looks, the ideal would appear to be at the tail end of this physical prime-25 to 28 or so. One could call this the "sweet spot".

At this point, a woman is old enough to have been done with college and built up a little life experience (traveled if she wanted to, held a job if she desired it, embarked on a career and decided what her long term idea would be with it, etc), but still young enough to be near peak physical attractiveness. It is a win-win. Older men looking for younger wives are best served targeting this demographic-any younger and they're just too immature, any older and there's just too much mileage (bad news if you're planning on several kids, less so if you're not). This is the "goldilocks" range.

As speakeasy said, this is a very American way of looking at things. This "Goldilocks" raqnge probably occurs much earlier in other places, where it is not common for one to remain a cultural adolescent well into their late 20's and where youth receive more "mature" responsibilities (alcohol, sex, etc) much earlier on. For American purposes, however, this fits well enough.

Only problem is that you have a girl who will be 30 or more in 5 years. If you get them at 21-23 you can enjoy their youth for at least 50% longer

[Excelsior]

(04-15-2012 11:21 AM)Riker Wrote:  

Only problem is that you have a girl who will be 30 or more in 5 years. If you get them at 21-23 you can enjoy their youth for at least 50% longer

This is true, and it is also one of the big advantages of broadening one's horizons beyond the US, where one will find that a) girls mature more rapidly and b) age gaps are less of a big deal (older guy dating young girl isn't considered "immoral"). This all allows you greater access to female youth than you'd have here.
America is, in many ways, a bit of a sex prison. The moral/cultural hangups regarding sex here limit things far too much.

[Spike]

I find this hard to answer. Most girls have the best bodies at the age from 16 till 23, after that their bodies begin sagging, well white girls that is. In Asia the bodies begin sagging at 35.

For talking/connecting etc etc i prefer a girl close to their 30's. They will be a lot better in bed also.

[Hotwheels]

If they don't squeeze out a few puppies and take care of themselves, American broads can keep a good body into their late 30's. I've been with 35 to 40 year olds that have tits that would make a 20 year old proud.

The key was no kids and they were B's. Bigger cans definitely run into gravity problems over the years.

On the flip side I've seen some fucked up tits on 25 year olds that have a couple kids.

[Samseau]

No question. 17-22 is the hottest years of a woman's life, and therefore the most desirable.

Your penis will thank you.

[Kitsune]

I put between late teens - 25. Not much to add really. Might change as I get older.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

20-22. The girl is still as hot as when she were 18, but has gained (usually for the better) some more fashion style and is less inane (as far as women go nowadays) than a teenager who drones on and on about school. But I'm not picky.