Middle-Aged Babies

Lately, I've been feeling like I'm the butt of some sick joke involving me and middle-aged men.  Like moth to a flame, this particular demographic of men is drawn to me for some unknown reason--and believe me I'm not bragging. 

Or maybe its not me, maybe its just that I happen to be a Twenty-something year old girl.

It's not a novelty that men are attracted to women younger than them, and women are attracted to men who are older than them.  Psychology states that women develop emotionally faster than men.  Biology states that a woman's ability to reproduce expires way faster than a man, making younger women a prized possession compared to their menopausal elders.  To top that off, men tend to place a higher value on physical attractiveness, making the younger woman, once again, the victors in the most desirable demographic race.

Being a Twenty-something, I get that age-lines tend to get blurred.  22 and 28? meh, not that big of a deal.  A ten year difference even becomes less of a thing as we all age.  But when men in their 50's actively pursue me? Then we have a problem.  We've all seen it on T.V. , middle-aged billionaire men who parade women around  20-30 years their junior.  Forgive me for being harsh, but it all seems perverted, predatory, and just overall pathetic.

Do you really think that hot brazilian model would be dating that not-so attractive older man (ie. Donald Trump) if he didn't have money? I don't think so.

So what's the root cause of this trend? Is it the age old "women want security, men want to spread their seed" thing, or do many middle-aged men go through a crisis in the life that makes them want to seem like they are still hip and youthful by garnering a younger woman?

I also wonder if more middle-aged men would pursue hot 20 yr old models if they had the money to buy them.  In any case, middle-aged men, leave me alone!!

Facebook Spies

The phone rings at 2 am. You're wondering who's calling you at such a late hour, and then one of your closest friend's names pops up on the screen.  You answer praying that she's okay, when she tells you she just found (insert boo's name here) chatting it up with his ex-girlfriend on Facebook, and its all over his page!

We've all heard stories like these before.  Some unsavory behavior is discovered on Facebook after you or a friend went through tagged photos, wall-to-wall comments, picture comments and friends of friends pages, until you find something--that "a-ha! I knew it!" moment that you will confront your S/O about when he/she gets home.

But does all this Facebook spying relieve relationship anxiety or worsen it?

I was discussing this same issue with one of my good friends recently. Her argument was that if you have a gut feeling that your man is doing something you don't like, then its okay to snoop on him. My argument was that if he gives you a bad feeling, it doesn't matter whether you have spied or not, you already lost your trust.  If you spy, find something you don't like, but stay in the relationship then why does it even matter.  It only really matters if you leave or change the boundaries of the relationship.

If you are the type that MUST  know everything in order to feel sane, then doesn't that mean you cannot trust your partner?  Trust implies that you don't need evidence that your man is doing the right thing, you already assume he is.  

So then what happens to those who trust their partner but have Facebook proof that they shouldn't be so trusting?  Say, for instance, you have an issue with your boyfriend drinking, but then find  an incriminating Facebook photo of him at a party with an empty shot glass in front of him and eyes that look foggy and glazed over.

If he was indeed drinking, do you leave him or give him a reprimand and stay with him?

Do you even confront him about the photo and just trust that he wasn't drinking and assume that it was someone else's drink in front of him?

Are you guilty of Facebook Spying?

The American Dream

America is the land of opportunity.  Its the place where everyone is supposed to have equal opportunity to achieve their ultimate goals in life, which in most cases include being filthy rich.

The problem with this is that it is ideal but not the reality. 

The reality is that the rich cannot exist without the poor.  You have to take from someplace in order to have the skewed distribution of wealth that is so prominent on wall street.

The reality is capitlism has a way of finding its victims, while simultaneously blaming them for their woes.  In most cases the victims happen to be minorities.

The reality is corporations and politicians exploit these dreams and make a profit of you when the reality hits.

So when do we start taking personal responsibility for ignoring the reality in hopes of realizing the "dream"? If you have bad credit and still take out a large bank loan  in order to purchase a home, or max out your $2000 card limit in order to get that big screen TV, whose fault is it the you're in over your head in debt? You or the companies'?

The reason why we are in this recession is not solely the fault of the government or the big companies, we are at  fault as well for focusing too much on the ideology and ignoring the reality.  The phrase "mind over matter" is overrated.  We have faced a cultural shift in which anybody can be anything because they said so, and have been enabled by people willing to make money off them.

Is this wrong?

Is it okay to try to live for an ideal instead of living in reality?