Age difference

[kaylan]

Women tend to prefer men to be a little older than them (5-7 years). A lot of them don't prefer very large age gaps, but in general they do like somewhat older men. You can't' blame men for merely accommodating female dating preferences.

 

Um...actually the average age gap in relationships is 3 years in the US. A simple google of stats will show you the averages for different countries. Lets not pretend older guys trolling for young gals is about what women want.

[kaylan]

Haha well my gf is my age (well a few months younger) so there's no freudian slip thing going on. Besides I'm only 25 so I can only go so young (legally at least ). But I did my own research looking at Okcupid users in my area (Washington D.C.). And my findings supported what I'm saying: http://www.loveshack.org/forums/t307757/</p>

You know, maybe it's just the women in my area, but I see it all the time.

 

Your experiment is fail. Especially with its ridiculously small sample size and lack of statistical controls. Okcupid did a study on this a while back. Women become more open to dating younger guys by their mid 20s on average. Here ya go.

 

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-case-for-an-older-woman/

Edited January 28, 2012 by kaylan

[aj22one]

Your experiment is fail. Especially with its ridiculously small sample size and lack of statistical controls. Okcupid did a study on this a while back. Women become more open to dating younger guys by their mid 20s on average. Here ya go.

 

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/the-case-for-an-older-woman/

 

Thanks pal. Way to tell a statistician how to do statistics.

 

I've seen that blog post, but I prefer to do my own research. Again, I'm not saying women like men 15 years older than them but I'd say 5 years is about right. And again not every girl is like this but in general.

[kaylan]

Thanks pal. Way to tell a statistician how to do statistics.

 

I've seen that blog post, but I prefer to do my own research. Again, I'm not saying women like men 15 years older than them but I'd say 5 years is about right. And again not every girl is like this but in general.

 

Ok then Mr. Stats. You prefer to do research that yields invalid results with small sample sizes. Compared to the site owners who have complete stats and different algoritms to work with. Ok.

 

And if you read my earlier response, Im telling you that most women date guys their age or around 3 years of their age on average. Look it up, or would you like me to link you that as well...since you seem to prefer stating opinions as fact. Im 25 and set my dating preference to 20-30 on OKCupid...however all girls I have dated have been within 3 years of my age.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Haha well my gf is my age (well a few months younger) so there's no freudian slip thing going on. Besides I'm only 25 so I can only go so young (legally at least ). But I did my own research looking at Okcupid users in my area (Washington D.C.). And my findings supported what I'm saying: http://www.loveshack.org/forums/t307757/

 

You know, maybe it's just the women in my area, but I see it all the time.

 

You know, it's really creepy when men 21+ make jokes about "legal" girls. With that whole "haha, wink wink. Aren't I cute and such a good guy that I don't do underage girls" comments.

 

In my own experiences, most of my friends have married people they were in college or high school with.

 

I am also getting tired of people pulling Okcupid stat info like it's 100% legit. But that's just me. It's a dating/social site. Not Time Magazine.

[123321]

Um...actually the average age gap in relationships is 3 years in the US. A simple google of stats will show you the averages for different countries. Lets not pretend older guys trolling for young gals is about what women want.

 

Let's not pretend that the average age gap is a meaningful measure either.

 

For instance, men aged 22 are unlikely to have much age gap, whereas men aged 45 might have more. In fact if you look more deeply into the statistics you will see this is true. The average age spread for men aged 40 or 50 was much larger, more like 7 or 10 years, whereas the age spread for men aged 20 was virtually nothing. Add that to the fact that in the past and even now, a lot of people tend to pair off young and you can see how the "average" number is basically useless for looking at what is happening in the dating market for men age 40+.

 

Interestingly, the same was not true for women, for women age 40+ the age gap tended to be near zero to negative; they tended to marry similar aged or older men.

 

Looking at it another way, when it's possible, women tend to pair off with older men. When it's not (when the man is very young) the cohorts tend to be similar aged.

 

 

For another example of lying with statistics, look into the difference between the average (mean) income in the USA and the median. For instance the average income in America for a household of 3 in 2008 was apparently almost $400K, but you won't meet a lot of families who earned that.

[kaylan]

Let's not pretend that the average age gap is a meaningful measure either.

 

For instance, men aged 22 are unlikely to have much age gap, whereas men aged 45 might have more. In fact if you look more deeply into the statistics you will see this is true. The average age spread for men aged 40 or 50 was much larger, more like 7 or 10 years, whereas the age spread for men aged 20 was virtually nothing.

You seem to be simply stating your opinion here.

 

Can you provide links that show young men have less age gaps than older men?

Add that to the fact that in the past and even now, a lot of people tend to pair off young and you can see how the "average" number is basically useless for looking at what is happening in the dating market for men age 40+.

The average age of marriage in the US in 26 for women and 28 for men. I wouldnt consider that super young. In general, the majority people of any age pair off with someone around their age. They usually have more in common with them so it makes sense.

 

Interestingly, the same was not true for women, for women age 40+ the age gap tended to be near zero to negative; they tended to marry similar aged or older men.

Didnt I just say that women tend to date guys their age or a little older?

 

Aside from what numerous sources say on this, all we have to do is look around us. Most folks are with people their age or near their age.

 

Looking at it another way, when it's possible, women tend to pair off with older men. When it's not (when the man is very young) the cohorts tend to be similar aged.

First you need to tell me what you consider to be "older".

 

And how can you make such an assertion? Was a survey done that showed women want an "older" guy versus a guy around their age? If anything all I have ever seen is that women are more open to guys older than them, but only to a point. This doesnt mean that they prefer someone much older vs someone nearer to their age.

 

Most women date guys older than them, but these dudes tend to be older by only a couple or a few years based on any numbers I have seen.

 

For another example of lying with statistics, look into the difference between the average (mean) income in the USA and the median. For instance the average income in America for a household of 3 in 2008 was apparently almost $400K, but you won't meet a lot of families who earned that.

Economics is a whole different thing, because the numbers are much larger...so you use medians to gather meaningful info instead of an average. Especially when rich-poor gaps exist and are large.

 

For something as small as relationship age gaps, all results I have seen only provide averages, and if you want to throw averages away as meaningless results when it comes to smaller numbers...then you cannot prove your point, nor disprove mine.

 

As we know, means are sensitive to extreme scores when population samples are small. But in the case of low numerals(under 100 in the case of age) and adequate sample sizes, means provide valid results.

 

Of course you could tell me that the average of 3.5 years age gap is a result of a higher number of zero age gaps being weighted against 7 year age gaps, but lets be real here. We know from experience and looking around us that age gaps run the gamut, but we can see that in most couples, the two people are within the same age group.

 

EDIT: And heres some info regarding 3 person household incomes.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States#cite_note-US_Census_Bureau.2C_median_household_income_according_to_certain_demographic_characteristics-60

 

"According to the US Census Bureau 2004 Community Survey, two-person households had a median income of $39,755, with $48,957 for three-person households, $54,338 for four-person households, $50,905 for five-person households, $45,435 for six-person households, with seven-or-more-person households having the second lowest median income of only $42,471."

 

Hell given the amount of poor people we have in comparison to rich people in this country, those figures could be lower if means were used. In which case, you can read this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States#Mean_income

 

If anything using means would help your point, rather than hurt it.

" In 2004 the median household income in the United States was $44,389."

"Overall, the mean household income in the United States, according to the US Census Bureau 2004 Economic Survey, was $60,528...."

 

The means seem to skew the numbers higher. Either way both numbers would be FAR away from your stated 400k for 3 person households.

Edited January 29, 2012 by kaylan

[123321]

You seem to be simply stating your opinion here.

 

Can you provide links that show young men have less age gaps than older men?

 

Enjoy.

 

Notice that as men get older they are more likely to marry a younger woman, and as women get older they are more likely to marry an older man.

 

 

 

 

And how can you make such an assertion? Was a survey done that showed women want an "older" guy versus a guy around their age?

 

It's a data mining study to see what they actually end up doing instead of what they are saying.

 

 

 

 

Economics is a whole different thing, because the numbers are much larger.

 

That has nothing to do with it, the reason is simply a matter of data distribution.

 

 

 

 

The means seem to skew the numbers higher. Either way both numbers would be FAR away from your stated 400k for 3 person households.

 

Well I know that per person income in the USA in 2008is given as $135Kish, and that if you multiply that by 3 ....

 

While *I* did better than that I doubt that was typical.

[kaylan]

Enjoy.

 

Notice that as men get older they are more likely to marry a younger woman, and as women get older they are more likely to marry an older man.

Dead link. 404 error

 

It's a data mining study to see what they actually end up doing instead of what they are saying.

Supply me with a good link =P

 

That has nothing to do with it, the reason is simply a matter of data distribution.

Distribution is always important, but when dealing with larger numbers and decent sized samples, medians are a better judge than means.

 

 

Well I know that per person income in the USA in 2008is given as $135Kish, and that if you multiply that by 3 ....

 

While *I* did better than that I doubt that was typical.

Did you even read any of the numbers I posted before? Again you are far off the mark.

 

The per capita income is not even close to what you stated.

 

http://bber.unm.edu/econ/us-pci.htm

 

You do realize there are more poor than rich in our country right? So despite all that money the rich makes, it still doesnt make the per person income as high as you are stating. Not with 300 million plus in our population.

[kaylan]

NVM....just googled your study and found a link. Will post ina sec.

 

1. The study you provided is a study of England and Wales. I thought we were talking about America in our discussion? Either way, Ill let it slide and run with it since its a Western nation and our "mother land" anyways.

 

2. I will mean 5 plus years or more in gap when I use the word "older".

 

It is not until over 40 age group in men, that the percentage of marriages to "older" men is greater than that of same age and younger men. So you were correct with this original statement.

 

3. According to your provided study, almost 80 percent of marriages happen before the age of 40. Hence MOST people marry closer to their own age as I said ALL ALONG.

Edited January 29, 2012 by kaylan

[123321]

.... when dealing with larger numbers and decent sized samples, medians are a better judge than means.

 

First, judge of what? Better without context is just a dumb thing to say in this context.

 

Second, no. It's all about the data distribution, not the number of zeros. If we reported income in cents or Yen, the number would be much bigger but that statistical information would be IDENTICAL.

 

Third, it's really hard to get an actual "average income" (mean) number I had to look about 12 seconds for the marriage study and a lot longer, stumbling over charts like the one you linked, to find the real numbers. Because average in that context is so useless no one bothers to use it, basically.

[123321]

1. The study you provided is a study of England and Wales. I thought we were talking about America in our discussion? Either way, Ill let it slide and run with it since its a Western nation and our "mother land" anyways.

 

It was one of the first in depth studies to pop out there are others, gut I have no reason to suspect the habits in UK are a lot different than here, I guess you agree.

 

 

 

 

2. I will mean 5 plus years or more in gap when I use the word "older".

 

Not 3 huh?

 

 

 

 

It is not until over 40 age group in men, that the percentage of marriages to "older" men is greater than that of same age and younger men. So you were correct with this original statement.

 

It's an infuriating fact of life that while I'm sometimes wrong, it's not often. Most of the time I know what I know and if I don't know I STFU.

 

 

 

 

3. According to your provided study, almost 80 percent of marriages happen before the age of 40. Hence MOST people marry closer to their own age as I said ALL ALONG.

 

Well if you were dating women 10 years younger at 25 it would be ... socially unacceptable, shall we say? Of course it's uncommon. None of that matters to a 40+ year old guy getting a date or a woman looking to date a 40+ guy, which is sorta the whole subject of this thread.

[kaylan]

First, judge of what? Better without context is just a dumb thing to say in this context.

Says the guy who simply gives his opinion as fact and then brushes of my citations.

Second, no. It's all about the data distribution, not the number of zeros. If we reported income in cents or Yen, the number would be much bigger but that statistical information would be IDENTICAL.

Ok well if its simply all about distribution, you cannot dismiss the numbers I provided you regarding mean and median incomes.

Third, it's really hard to get an actual "average income" (mean) number I had to look about 12 seconds for the marriage study and a lot longer, stumbling over charts like the one you linked, to find the real numbers. Because average in that context is so useless no one bothers to use it, basically.

???

 

How is it really hard? You came up with some off the wall figures, and I provided you with quotes and an easy to read chart. Your figures were wrong. Simple as that. You vastly overstated per person income, and 3 person household income.

 

Just say you were wrong and making silly assertions that werent factual in any way, and leave it at that.

 

Average is only useless in your opinion because its not proving your points correct.

[123321]

Average is only useless in your opinion because its not proving your points correct.

 

It has nothing to do with the magnitude o the numbers, we could express the ages as milliseconds or the incomes in megabucks and the statistical information would be identical. I can't say it any simpler.

 

Mean (average is an ambiguous term) is only useful in determining what is typical or the norm if the distribution approaches a Gaussian one; the further it deviates from this the less likely mean is to be a useful determiner of what is normal. As in conforming to the norm.

 

So it's not useless at all, just useless in this application.

[kaylan]

It was one of the first in depth studies to pop out there are others, gut I have no reason to suspect the habits in UK are a lot different than here, I guess you agree.

?

 

1. In the UK, they get married a couple years later than Americans. This is for men and women.

 

2. If you read your study, you would see that it says that getting married at a later age changes marriage difference ages. When you add in differences in culture as well, you should very well expect their habits not to be identical to ours.

 

 

 

Not 3 huh?

I was simply defining what an "older man" would be. A 3 year average gap is simply dating someone your age really. Hell the average age differences given for some of the age ranges in your study had less than 3 year gap averages.

 

 

 

It's an infuriating fact of life that while I'm sometimes wrong, it's not often. Most of the time I know what I know and if I don't know I STFU.

Ok, chief. My reasoning for asking you to back up that original point was to make sure it came from some sort of facts, and not just opinion. Some posters spout off opinions as facts on this forum sometimes.

 

 

 

 

 

Well if you were dating women 10 years younger at 25 it would be ... socially unacceptable, shall we say? Of course it's uncommon. None of that matters to a 40+ year old guy getting a date or a woman looking to date a 40+ guy, which is sorta the whole subject of this thread.

Um ok?

 

But your study still shows people in their 30s mostly dating people their age. They could surely dating 10 years younger and it be legal, but most dont. Should I start quoting the study in this thread? Because you seem to not have read it as much as I have.

 

Anyways, my original point stands correct. Most folks dating people closer to their age. And considering that most people dating are under 40, all your study did was prove me right.

 

Your study also mentioned that divorce seems to happen more often as the age gap increases. It also mentioned death being an issue, which is obvious with very wide age gaps.

[kaylan]

It has nothing to do with the magnitude o the numbers, we could express the ages as milliseconds or the incomes in megabucks and the statistical information would be identical. I can't say it any simpler.

 

Mean (average is an ambiguous term) is only useful in determining what is typical or the norm if the distribution approaches a Gaussian one; the further it deviates from this the less likely mean is to be a useful determiner of what is normal. As in conforming to the norm.

 

So it's not useless at all, just useless in this application.

But I gave you means and medians for those income numbers you came up with. You were FAR off the mark either way.

 

Am I really going to take your word for it over a government agency filled with professionals, that the methods they use are useless?

 

Its simple...you came up with off the wall figures and were wrong both times. End of story.

[123321]

How is it really hard?

 

If you drill into the method used to compute it past the short heading or footnote most of them use some sort of median or average of the averages method to normalize the data before presenting it.

 

I managed to find a simple chart that charted the raw revenue divided by population, and it showed about $135,000 per person in 2008, which was of course a local maxima. It rose to that and then dropped again, in other words.

[123321]

Your study also mentioned that divorce seems to happen more often as the age gap increases.

 

That would be "Figure 8" which to my eyes shows no such thing, in fact the frequency of divorce is only higher in cases where - wait for it - the woman is older. The little droop in the lines at the right in the direction of "husband older" means they are LESS likely to divorce.

 

In fact the most likely to divorce are women 15 or more years older than their husband and women 3 years or so younger than their husbands.

 

Yes?

[kaylan]

That would be "Figure 8" which to my eyes shows no such thing, in fact the frequency of divorce is only higher in cases where - wait for it - the woman is older. The little droop in the lines at the right in the direction of "husband older" means they are LESS likely to divorce.

 

In fact the most likely to divorce are women 15 or more years older than their husband and women 3 years or so younger than their husbands.

 

Yes?

I meant to say divorces happen no more often as the age gap increases. You posted before I could proof read my post.

 

From the study: "This

suggests that propensity to divorce is not strongly associated with marital

age difference at an aggregate level, although further research would be

required to control for mortality and any other factors that may affect the

risk of divorce."

 

That quote is why I mentioned divorced and death.

[kaylan]

If you drill into the method used to compute it past the short heading or footnote most of them use some sort of median or average of the averages method to normalize the data before presenting it.

If this is so, please cite your hypothesis. Till then its just you making assumptions about the methods used.

 

I managed to find a simple chart that charted the raw revenue divided by population, and it showed about $135,000 per person in 2008, which was of course a local maxima. It rose to that and then dropped again, in other words.

Link then please. Because every single piece of data and fact that I have seen, put per capita income no where NEAR that figure you present.

 

You originally stated that per person(per capita) income was 135k...so I would like to see this. And I hope its not a chart showing that the figure rose to 135k and then settled at the figured I presented, since youre now bringing up local maxima.

 

I want to see year end fiscal data for the entire nation.

 

P.S. - After the next response or two, if you wish to continue this, we should move this to PM....because no we are just hijacking a thread and going off course.

Edited January 29, 2012 by kaylan

[123321]

You originally stated that per person(per capita) income was 135k

 

It was a quarterly chart, it's not really germane to the topic, and it might have been right or wrong, I didn't fact check it. Another source says $40K and $60K for some year I forget, about a decade ago before the bubble.

 

If you want to dig into income disparity for some reason yes, you should start a new thread.

 

If you want to discuss why the use of average in the case of "average age differences at marriage" is bound to skew the results, well I think the charts in the study show why this is true and that's all I was trying to explain.

[kaylan]

It was a quarterly chart, it's not really germane to the topic, and it might have been right or wrong, I didn't fact check it. Another source says $40K and $60K for some year I forget, about a decade ago before the bubble.

 

If you want to dig into income disparity for some reason yes, you should start a new thread.

 

If you want to discuss why the use of average in the case of "average age differences at marriage" is bound to skew the results, well I think the charts in the study show why this is true and that's all I was trying to explain.

 

1. You didnt fact check but you made claims regarding mean income figures in an attempt to downplay the means I stated for age gaps. Why make clains that cant be backed up? And then post a study that supports my original claim.

 

2. I was not trying to dig into income disparity...you were the one who made false claims originally. I simply challenged those claims since you were using those claims to support your point regarding relationship age gap.

 

3. Averages hardly skew the results in this case when you take into account the proportions of each age group. The fact that the "large age gap" groups only make up a minority of the numbers means theres not much skew to be had. Your study basically showed that most numbers fit in the "dates own age range" camp.

 

This is why we have standard deviations. They explain the spread of data more.

[123321]

This is why we have standard deviations. They explain the spread of data more.

 

Um no, I suspect you might be wading out of your comfort zone here. While it's true that a sigma computation will give you some info about "deviations" it's very limited unless the distribution is Gaussian, in which case there are a set of mathematical laws the data will follow, including where it's located, how much is how far, and so on.

 

If the data is NOT coerced into a bell curve then the sigma is a lot less useful.

 

Neither of these data sets approximate a Gaussian distribution.

 

 

 

 

But your study still shows people in their 30s mostly dating people their age.

 

Let me help you decipher the OP.

 

"What do you guys think of women dating men in their 40s and older if those women are 15 or more years younger?"

 

Why would I say that is the summary? Because she asked about dating men 15 or 20 years older, and in a very early post she says she's in her late 20s. We'll call it 27 + 15 = 42 minimum. Based on that context, what age are 42 year old men dating?

 

It's not "an average of 3 years younger", according to the data. In fact in the range 42-49 it's over twice that I think, with a pretty wide distribution.

[kaylan]

Um no, I suspect you might be wading out of your comfort zone here. While it's true that a sigma computation will give you some info about "deviations" it's very limited unless the distribution is Gaussian, in which case there are a set of mathematical laws the data will follow, including where it's located, how much is how far, and so on.

 

If the data is NOT coerced into a bell curve then the sigma is a lot less useful.

 

Neither of these data sets approximate a Gaussian distribution.

Out of my comfort zone? What are you arguing here?

 

I studied a good bit of stats in school bro. All I simply said is that spread would help us if we had it rather than only means and medians....that is if we assume a normal distribution. Excuse me for not adding that. If the study you showed me was a normal distribution, I would have used standard devs to help my argument, but I didnt, so its not like I am clueless here. I simply looked at the proportions that were recorded, without mentioning means. Either way the study only backed up what I said, but if you wish to continue this exchange, I can PM you with a study and my findings from an actual United States study.

 

With your continuous casting down of medians and means I simply made the statement that standard deviations can be helpful in stats, and that they explain spread. Which they do. I made no claim about the study at hand's standard devs.

 

Still, none of what you have said disproves my original point.

 

Lets recap:

 

1. I make a claim based on studies and figures Ive seen.

 

2. You make a counter claim.

 

3. You provide a study to back up your views.

 

4. Your study backs up your viewpoint, but this viewpoint only concerns a small percentage of those dating thus not negating my original statements. However your study proves my original statement that most people date close to their own age.

 

 

Let me help you decipher the OP.

 

"What do you guys think of women dating men in their 40s and older if those women are 15 or more years younger?"

 

Why would I say that is the summary? Because she asked about dating men 15 or 20 years older, and in a very early post she says she's in her late 20s. We'll call it 27 + 15 = 42 minimum. Based on that context, what age are 42 year old men dating?

 

It's not "an average of 3 years younger", according to the data. In fact in the range 42-49 it's over twice that I think, with a pretty wide distribution.

No need to decipher anything for me.

 

The OP asked a question, it was answered by many, and then as the convo moved along, it was stated what the average age gap in relationships were. And it was also stated that most couples date someone their own age or slightly older.

 

Then you began to protest those statements, but have only helped to prove it as true, so thanks for the study. Its a good read actually.

Edited January 29, 2012 by kaylan

[FitChick]

Perhaps you would like to continue this private conversation via PM.