"Unattractive" at Age? A Myth Debunked

They say 'when women age, they're no longer attractive'. That statement has always struck me as utterly pointless. Mainly because it is misogynistic and creates a bigger gap between genders. It also reminds me of unspoken social rules that I'm very aware of but try to forget as I go about my day. But, more than that, I always thought it lacked precision to even start becoming debatable. Attractive to whom? And what kind of attractiveness are we talking about exactly? What is attractive to me might not be to you and vice versa. Anyone hearing such an opinion and thinking about it for a few seconds, would get to the conclusion that it is indeed, demeaning and senseless. Or they should.

And that's the point. They should. Because some of them don't. So, I'm starting to wonder; what are we missing here? What's stronger than pure logic and common sense? Dont' get too excited, I don't have all of the answers. But, I do have theories.

Theories that are powered by scientific research, critical thinking based on reading and, of course, personal experience and / or experimentation. According to me, all three are needed to be considered as an interesting voice in any matter. The thing is, most people using their voice when it comes to women, do not bother gathering all three. Most of them will have one and for the rest, usually none. Don't be mistaken, even women fall for that trick and sometimes, use their voices for what I consider being a pointless message or, even worse, a dangerous message. It would be fine if these voices were only used to talk to their bathroom mirrors but, unfortunately, media and the internet have their own ways.

'Aging women, are no longer attractive'. Well, research shows that age impacts men and women the same way, as discussed by authors like Sheila Jeffreys on beauty standards and their impacts. You'll have to consider many demographics such as the type of work they're doing, the place they live and the weather there, what they eat, if they exercise regularly, genetics and potential hereditary health issues etc. It means that the attractiveness we're talking about is mainly based on subjective appreciation. Note that subjectiveness is itself, based on personal experience, education, surroundings etc. So, let me ask you: where does your subjectiveness start and where does influence stop?

Theory #1: Women have become products in a marketing world made by and for men.

As Robert Cialdini famously outlines in his book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, social proof is one of the strongest arguments. Considering women on their individual attractiveness and having a majority of people agreeing to those standards, means that a few decision makers have made a list of what should or shouldn't be considered attractive and the rest of us, have agreed to it. Their message is simple 'we make the rules, we create the issue and we provide the solution'. Cashing the money along the way, of course.

Here's an example; they've decided that women's waists should be thin and tiny. They have agreed on the fact that having a bigger stomach or a larger belly, isn't attractive. To make sure everyone gets the message, they have widely showed what was expected of women in the society through magazines, movies etc. Natural consequence of their propaganda: creating a problem for those who weren't fitting into the box or, in this case, in small-sized Jeans. They're last step was to provide solutions. Choose your poison: diets, pills, coaching, subscriptions to anything you can dream of and more with miracle promises and pictures of people showing off their new figures.

Social proof it is; I want it because everybody else has it or talks about it or would like to have it. It is socially accepted and it will make me feel like I'm part of the group. Problem is, we're not meant to be part of a group that wide. Being part of the community applies to neighbourhoods, villages, small towns at best. Wanting to be part of the group that is modern society equals wanting validation from half of the world's population - people all connected by one single network: the internet. It is a herculean task and, to be fair, I'm not even sure that he, would be up for it.

Comparing women to products in a men's world might sound surprising to you and please, don't get me wrong, my words are non-judgmental. But think about it for a second. Many women display themselves as we would display items on store shelf. Once again, are they doing so consciously or unconsciously? Is their behaviour based on subjectiveness (personal appreciation and preferences) or influence? I can't help but remind myself: what happens when people are done with their purchase? They get another one. One that is shinnier. One that feels brand new...

Theory #2: Women must be shallow to survive.

Shallowness as a surviving method, to belong to the group and to get society's approval. Again, whether it's a conscious or an unconscious choice, women end up facing, at some point, the same old dilemma: be an outsider and focus on what's important to them or bend to society's will and fit into, if not all, some of the boxes. 

Though, not all of them need to turn their back to standards... Women won't be surprised to read that a major part of them, once in the company of other ladies, have deep conversation about society, arts and literature, philosophy, education, finances, economics, sciences etc. They gather to gossip, true. But, what's gossip if not news from the world? They find in each other what they're missing from their daily lives: intellectual challenges. I know this one won't please everyone and it might hurt some feelings but... Life's tough. And careful, don't get confused, domestic and mental charge is not the same thing. Now that we're talking about it... All of these statistics we're introduced to regarding burn-outs... How many of them are actually bore-outs?

Titiou Lecoq, the French author and researcher whose work, such as Le Couple et l'Argent, mentions that many women are still not offered the same amount of job opportunities throughout their careers and, many times, they're actually slowed down by the birth of a child or other important life and family events. On the opposite, when men become fathers, they get rewarded and usually get a promotion with new responsibilities and new wages. I don't know about you but I do not recall that chapter being taught in my Economics' class.

Men gather for social needs and survival. Hunters hunt in groups. Men look for the approval of other men as being rejected from the group would equal being in danger as an easy prey. Let's call it atavistic behaviour. Very few of them walk away from all social norms and expectations. Critical thinking and independent opinions become a choice and usually, an unpopular one. Nonetheless, it doesn't seem to be a legitimate reason, or not good enough anyway, to firmly cast those ones away. Why? That's a question for another time.

Therefore, shallowness becomes an escape, a facade, an easy way to fit in. It doesn't have to be someone's real personality, it just has to be a good enough costume to wear in the crowd. Whereas most men won't have to make such a choice during their life, women are early taught to go against their instinct to avoid making waves. In fact, their real challenge is staying afloat while the rest of the world births tsunamis.

But let's get back to women and the way they age. We have established that voluntarily or unvoluntarily, they're part of a system they did not create nor were part of the decision-making process. In other words: they're forced to play a game no one ever asked them if they wanted to play AND the rules are unfair to them, because of their gender - gender is also given by society, let's not forget that part.

Many authors will agree on the matter: aging isn't something we like to see. We hide it away. We put makeup on our wrinkles and drop our elderly in 'nice' houses where they'll be other people like them. You know, the old kind. Getting older also means becoming useless to the community. Or at least, that's what many think. And this statement, is particularly true for women. Not being able to work is one thing but not bearing children anymore, is a whole different issue. I hear you, this one hits hard. Believe it or not and, like it or not, we're still debating about it: perpetuating life. The same old issue. You would think we're passed that, we have evolved, we are no longer bothered by such primal instincts and problems. Well, I disagree. And, unfortunately, the news we get from the world are disagreeing as well.

I have one last theory that I would like to share with you.

Theory #3: Society is the reason why women age.

'Words have weight and mean more than we think'. I've always considered that statement being particularly true. The words we use, especially when we're sharing feelings aren't chosen accidentally. One's brain associates the way one feels with the words it'll use to describe it. Next time you'll hear your mother tell you or your siblings that the worry you bring her makes her age sooner than it should, remember my words.

So, what if society and people's choices and behaviours, were the reasons women age? What if, aging women and their so-called 'non-attractiveness' is nothing but the reflection of our society's delusions and mistakes? What if their bodies were the canvas on which our faults land and, with their worried eyes and loving faces, they patiently waited for us to change our ways? No one likes to be reminded of their bad choices and oversights. Facing them requires courage and self-reflection. Maybe that is the reason why we hear word in the street that women are no longer attractive when they get older. Maybe it simply is because it reminds us of how we treated them and the little time we have left with their worry-less smiles.