I would like to comment on Dan Savage’s otherwise good advice in response to “Hominid Frustrated With His Hindbrain,” the guy who wanted to know whether he should satisfy his “meat needs” or his “mind-o-meter” (Savage Love, 4/20). Savage suggested to HFWHH that those “30-year-old women [he admires] for their brains and independence were once relatively empty-headed 24-year-olds.”
I don’t believe that he was giving enough credit to the women in this age category. I believe that women in their mid-20s are far from empty-headed. I am a 26-year-old female working her way through school, as many women are in their mid-20s. I beg to differ if I’m ever called empty-headed.
HFWHH also suggested that 30-year-old single, independent women “are less than stunning.” Where is he meeting these 30-year-olds? He’s making 30-year-olds out to be old hags. These 30-year-olds only have six years on 24-year-olds. I don’t recall the average woman growing significant crow’s feet and heads of gray hair in just six years’ time. They also don’t develop that much more intellect and emotional maturity, as HFWHH suggests. From my experience, you can be ignorant at any age. The 30-year-old women I’ve seen can be just as physically attractive as a woman in her mid-20s. (Savage was more accurate when he increased the age to 44 for a woman who is more likely to be “ravaged by gravity.” Even so, a 44-year-old with good maintenance can be physically attractive.)
HFWHH also suggested that he is a “reasonably good-looking male.” Perhaps he needs to lower his physical standards and settle for someone “reasonably good-looking” and not “stunning.” This way, he can score somewhere in the middle of both his meat-o-meter and his mind-o-meter.
And was HFWHH suggesting that he’s going to be a “reasonably good-looking male” forever? Because the last I checked, males age, too. And in my opinion, they age faster than women.
Manassas Park, Va.