My impression is you did not read or reply to my post with critical thinking. I encourage us to start again in the name of fair and civil discourse.
I've read your articles and will sum them and my counter points here as best I can with the URL's again pasted below the talking point:
1.) The first article is from medical daily written by and references other articles all written by ladies which claims that men are preferring older women using data from dating websites. It does not disclose the rate or the data used however. Its also drawing a false logical conclusion, at least from whats provided. For example its drawing its conclusion from what the average men use as their age search range. This is not a direct correlation to what men want to have a relationship with, but is indicative with what they will sleep with. A more useful statistic we could discuss would be how many men from that category led to significant long lasting relationships. Distinctly this article is a female perspective on mens desires without actually including data.
https://www.medicaldaily.com/age-just-number-younger-men-who-now-prefer-dating-older-women-320136
2.) Is a survey conducted for what an ideal partner is. It has a truly commendable data size, but only 3% of the data is male which is off putting in a survey used here to convey the male perspective. If anything it indicates a fantastically greater care and emphasis on female perspective while relatively ignoring the male. While the data is segregated by male/female perspective the talking points do not list age and I would highly argue that this article argues significantly in my favor. For example on the subject of purity and using their 0-6 scale with 0 being not important and 6 being highly important 42% of males stated that sexual experience is not important and 16% indicated that it was. The section on this is quite poor, a mere single compound sentence failing to break down what question was asked or what experience meant. It fails to address men's ideologies towards number of partners or what an acceptable/unacceptable amount of experience even is. However, if 42% say experience is unimportant, then its fair to say that with a roughly even distribution that 60-70% of men assign it some level of unimportant. While I've established this statistic is not directly relevant to my statements above that men value purity, it certainly argues more for my point that if asked men would prefer less sexual experience. A fantastic article, not just because it supports my points, but because I believe its a good read for men on this platform to examine precisely because of its emphasis on the female perspective and what women want. Thank you for referencing it.
https://assets.ctfassets.net/juauvlea4rbf/1kmtOU2RRXrAB9Jz1JRmwe/20ee3375a5ba9f2d31fcbf9fb5a2e541/191105_Ideal_partner_survey.pdf
3.) This is an article that briefly discusses the average age of marriage trending over the years. Specifically it states what percentage of population by age bracket has been married at least once. I love the data and how its presented however it really doesn't apply to my previous talking points. I said that Ladies receive less attention from men as they age, particularly after the age of 30. The data shown is a "swallow bracket" which means that statistical chance of being married by say the 50-60 range includes all of the ages past. The actual chart itself shows that 60%, the clear majority of people are married by the age of 30. Indicating that relationships started before 30, i.e a preference for younger paring. If anything, again this supports my point despite not being a direct implication of "attention" and mens preference. Finally it really should be noted that while the data is from a solid source...its for Minnesota of all places...1.7% of the United states. I love you ladies in Minnesota, but even assuming that the States were all culturally similar you don't meet the requirements of a statistically relevant sample. An interesting article but really not much of substance here, more of clickbait than anything.
https://www.businessinsider.com/average-marriage-age-united-states-2019-2#:~:text=Carl%20Court%2FGetty-,The%20average%20marriage%20age%20for%20Americans%20has%20increased%20over%20time,Insider's%20homepage%20for%20more%20stories.
4.) This article again discusses the marital age. Notably its a UK article so the numbers will be slightly different than found here in the US but generally acceptable. Here it makes two important points, one that the average age of marriage is starting to skew to after 30 and...big and...marital rates are dropping. Again...this is not directly relevant to my talking point. Relationships would likely start before 30 to hit the average of just after 30. The point about the marital rate dropping would either indicate that newer generations are not seeing value in marital status or as I did speak about people are not finding the traits they want in their prospective matches. Its a decent article from what appears to be reputable source by the name...but I found the tone and method unprofessional for something that seeks to represent a nation "Office for national statistics". If I cared to investigate the validity of sources I would try to see if this is backed by the U.K. or where it received its data from.
https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2019/04/01/married-by-30-youre-now-in-the-minority/
My turn. Thank you for your long articles, its a pleasure to speak with someone who attempts to back up their wording with information, data and statistics. You offered this: "I would LOVE to see any surveys saying most American men want "young and pure" partners"... to which I will happily and casually reply.
1.)
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/15/style/dating-apps-online-men-women-age.html
2.)
https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2015/07/03/ok-cupid-data-on-sex-desirability-and-age/
3.)
https://www.appstate.edu/~steelekm/classes/psy3100/Documents/buunk2001.pdf
4.)
https://www.businessinsider.com/dataclysm-shows-men-are-attracted-to-women-in-their-20s-2014-10
These were all on the first page of the search and there were many many more. My darling, it is clear that either your search was very brief, very biased or very cherry picked. Possibly all of those. Not researched, not critically reviewed. I offer you a bulk of four for this single point to show how easy it is to find this viewpoint despite your ignorance to it.
You also make a few claims here:
"he gives advice based on ZERO evidence Does he know your parents? In his world, you mom married your Dad "young and pure" at least 24 years ago when the world didn't immediately hunt and devour anyone with "purity" or decency on display."
And here:
"NO. For all he knows your Dad is in prison for killing your Mom"
My darling...this is a ridiculous and poor display of emotion over logic. I offered scenarios that were at least relatively likely. Rather than assume the extreme trauma of her father murdering her mother which is an incredible escalation of a discussion if I ever saw one...Perhaps you could see that I am urging her to seek her parents advice if she has them. This is a live discussion, she can correct me if I am wrong. Do you honestly question that there is no value in her asking her parents about this? You would seriously rather she learned hard life lessons from men and women you possibly have no care for her success or well being? Parents are in this world to teach us, yet so few of us lean on them for finding a life partner which in my experience is one of the most important things we all want. I am specifically targeting advice to offer her a man's perspective. Something a man can give. Not her mother but her father. Your escalation here is folly and derails an important point with less than a percent of a percent circumstance. If we as a people can assume nothing about the people we talk to, none of us are qualified to speak to each other.
You're also unquestionably a misandrist which is damaging to say the least. Your post like others here gives the man the poor end of the stick. Assuming, something you gave me no small amount of flak for, that he was married. Quite the double standard that others are not allowed to make assumptions while having an inherently negative and unproven view towards men. More evidence is in this statement "at least 24 years ago when the world didn't immediately hunt and devour anyone with "purity" or decency on display", you have a very negative view of past men. Your ideal appears to align that we were all some sort of monster that hunted down young girls and devoured them like candy. You assume, what is to you, the worst of men instead of presuming that men were worth being in a relationship with. That they valued those aspects in a woman and thus those girls were and arguably still are highly sought after. More you say this "innocent, moldable teenagers and live happily ever after with their personal June Cleaver. That's not reality. ", another blatant negative and malicious attribute assigned to men. This is a negative bias towards men, which is the definition of misandry like having a negative bias towards women is misogyny. Its socially unacceptable for men to express misogynistic views, its also unacceptable for women. Its not a privilege you own over men to spread such hatred.
Finally we really need to talk about this part. Its truly childish and wrong. "This type of negging has been used for millennia to attract young people who may have been raised in a way that makes them vulnerable to a very controlling relationship" Ludicrous. While I would enjoy being civil with you this is anything but. What I have expressed in men's preference. Which men are allowed to have. Just like ladies have all their check boxes they check off when they try to find someone they like, men are allowed to have aspects they seek in a relationship. Just because they are not the same values as a woman, does not make them wrong. It is blatantly wrong that this is negging in any way shape or form. At least no more so than any girl who ever complains about aspects of men she does prefer. I did not say she was a bad person if she was not any of these. I did not say she was less of a lady if she was any of these things. I did not say anyone was anything bad if they were not any of these things. I did not say she or anyone had to be any of these things. The POINT, is not that anyone should make themselves into anyone. The POINT is that if a person wants the optimal chance, the very best possibilities, of attracting someone they themselves are attracted to... It helps a great deal to play the odds where they will have the most success. For example...men...get a job, better if its high paying. Its tough in the dating market without one. Ladies, the majority of men prefer a girl under a certain dress size., attend the gym. If you have trouble with these things, excuses don't protect from others preferences. You either have to work harder for them or find another way to show how valuable you are. To this end I offered my experience as a man, which is far more valid than yours as a man, and encouraged her to seek out other male perspectives that would assist her in learning what would make her more successful. That fact that you assigned a negative value to this is frankly vitriolic, your misandrist values seeks to shame men for having preferences and discourage her from seeking guidance in the journey from real people who could offer her real insight. If she or any other woman feels shame or negging for not being what some artificial majority of men desire...that is on her and other ladies. It is not a poor reflection on the men who want those things or a man for allowing her and others an honest view into mens thoughts. Stop shaming men for their preference, or have none yourself.