Older Isn't Just Better
It's More Attractive
by A Feminist aka D.M. Dismore

Every once in awhile, a gleefully nonconformist Mother Nature (the ultimate "older woman") manages to defeat the youth-and-fertility-obsessed Mr. Darwin, and as the beneficiary of one of those delightful victories, I couldn't be happier about my exuberant attraction to mature women!

Now, after 80,000 generations of strict evolutionary programming that "reproductive potential = sexual desirability" being deliberately reinforced by many millennia of patriarchal indoctrination that males should only be attracted to females whose maturity, self-confidence, and ambitions are less than their own, you'd think that by now ALL men would be drawn to only the youngest of women. Happily not! (Hey, don't judge us all by Oval Office antics...)

But while the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender communities have each done a needed and commendable job of forcing society to realize that human sexuality is far more wonderful and diverse than religious absolutists would have us believe, we breederboys have failed to liberate ourselves and society from one of the most irrational and repressive aspects of OUR "programming": That youth is essential to a woman's attractiveness.

Of course, because of the incredible power and diversity that is inherent in sexuality, I don't expect - or even want - to "convert" all of society to my own personal views. But sexual liberation is never about "conversion" or trying to impose control on others through uniformity. It's about taking pride in your own values, feelings, and choices, while recognizing that so long as they don't engage in force, deception, or irresponsibility, even someone whose lifestyle may be opposite from your own is deserving of respect, and has an equal potential for happiness.

Though an active feminist for 25 years, my attraction to mature women goes back at least15 years earlier, so it's clearly not a new, or conveniently "anti-ageist" view I've made an attempt to cultivate. Nor, I'm happy to say, is my orientation "limiting", because I've always been attracted to some women approximately my own age as well. (The exact definition of "always" refers to March 8, 1959, when life was significantly enhanced by my first serious crush on a 7th grade classmate named "Joyce".) But as "politically incorrect" as it might seem for a future militant feminist, I'll also confess to being equally attracted to "traditional values TV mom" Barbara (June Cleaver) Billingsley at about the same time! And the fact that I find the 1999 appearances of both women even more attractive than their 1959 versions tells me something important: If I DO meet a T.C.W. (Truly Compatible Woman!) one day, and we spend a few decades improvising and inventing whatever kind of romantic relationship two "unrepentantly independent individualists" create, I won't be sticking with her "in spite of" the changes in face and body that aging brings, but partly "because of" those welcome changes.

Of course, while I'm content and confident about my own views, as a feminist I know that I have an obligation to challenge sexism and sexual repression in all its manifestations. So, it's time to question a major assumption that usually underlies all discussions of sexuality.

While an individual's basic sexual orientation is fixed and unchangeable, social attitudes are not, so we CAN attack and destroy the myth that there is an objective and universal definition of "beauty". The at first unsettling, but later comforting and liberating fact is that "beautiful" and "ugly" have no real meaning. Each of us is programmed by a unique combination of genetic and environmental factors to be sexually attracted to individuals with very specific physical characteristics. (Feel free to take a break and fantasize about YOUR ideal partner now, if you'd like...). But to pronounce one person "beautiful" and another "ugly" presumes that your own personal preferences are superior to another's, or that you somehow have the ability to make objective determinations about something which is inherently subjective. All that can truly be said is that someone is either "close to" or "far from" what you, personally, have been programmed to be attracted to. And while there's nothing wrong (and generally a lot right!) with following your own personal inclinations, there's a LOT wrong with a patriarchal society making a deliberate attempt to define female "beauty" in such a way as to assure that women LOSE, rather than GAIN prestige as they age.

As with all other aspects of liberation, the truth of human diversity is the best weapon against the repression of unthinking conformity. So, if seeing a perfectly-lined middle-aged face with a warm smile perks up my whole day the same way seeing a 20-year-old supermodel would brighten up someone else's life, then I feel just fine about that. And if while waiting in a grocery line I find myself discreetly admiring the varied faces and forms of mature women I see in the line rather than the all-look-alike anorexic teens on magazine covers displayed next to the line, that's OK too. In fact, it's BETTER than OK. Even if I had the impossible option of "re-programming" myself, I wouldn't. Why would I trade the ability to be regularly and joyfully attracted to women up to two decades or so on either side of my own age (53) for the narrow, Darwinian, Hefneresque, patriarchally reinforced restrictions of finding only women from 18-25 stimulating?

While my personal preferences are of no significance to anyone other than myself, confronting the evil of ageism - especially as it specifically oppresses women - is VERY important, and there are many ways to combat it. Personal testimonies certainly have a value, as does the fact that there is now a refreshing trend toward publicly celebrating the fact that many people enjoy seeing - and hearing from - women like Sophia Loren (65), Olivia Bacall (75), Rita Moreno (68), and Lena Horne (82). It shows that maybe we're starting to remember something we instinctively knew in High School. Back when you were a Junior, you would have been complemented if someone mistook you for a Senior, and insulted if they erroneously thought you were a Sophomore. Why? Because you knew that aging equaled experience, maturity, knowledge, and greater freedom to think for yourself. Well, that applies to adults, too! And if society can be persuaded to remember this self-evident truth, perhaps we'll start seeing some positive changes in attitudes and behaviors. Certainly at the top of the list of customs I'd like to see on the way to extinction: Trips to plastic surgeons to erase all traces of age (a disempowering practice that makes no more sense than a drill sergeant trying to remove their stripes in order to pretend to be an inexperienced, raw recruit). Instead, let's ALL take the same pride in those aptly-named "character lines" that the drill sergeant takes in their stripes, because each was earned the hard way, a day at a time, and signifies that someone has learned lessons taught only by experience, has meaningful things to say, and won the right to be taken seriously.

And though I certainly don't want to overtly encourage either "looksism" or discrimination against those I see as temporarily disadvantaged by immaturity, I admit that I'm looking forward to the day when among all the sexist and ageist graffiti and bumper stickers I see every day, a few of the more creative or literate ones begin to express the opinion that "An unlined face is as unintriguing as a book with a blank cover."

A Feminist

Bio: D.M. Dismore - Active feminist since 1974, (E.R.A., Repro Rights) who has had the good fortune to spend half those years doing for a salary what I once did for free: Preserving media coverage about today's struggle for women's equality, and happily researching feminist history via original newspaper articles and organizational documents.

send all mail to Afeminist@aol.com