Age Differences

[papayahed]

I'm usually pretty open minded but this seems a little skeevy, no?


The news that Hutchison, 51, married Courtney Alexis Stodden, 16, led to a storm of criticism online due to their age difference, although it is legal. "We're aware that our vast age difference is extremely controversial," the couple said in a statement to E! Online. "But we're very much in love and want to get the message out there that true love can be ageless."


http://channel6newsonline.com/2011/06/the-green-mile-actor-doug-hutchison-51-marries-16-year-old-girl/

[iamnobody]

It may be legal, but 16 is too young to get married to anyone.

[Paulclem]

You can't respect a bloke like that. Of course it happens all the time to a greater or lesser degree with rich men and young women. The worse thing is that she'll be his carer if it lasts.

[JuniperWoolf]

The legal age is 12 in Spain. Weird, eh?

[Delta40]

I think any teen getting married (or having children) is making a decision within the limits of their own capacity, which is subject to change all the time. I really don't know what to say about the 51 year old except that he isn't marrying her for intellectual stimulation.

One can only assume she yearns for the father figure and he is happy to reap the benefits of it!

[Lokasenna]

I know a few couples like that, and they seem happy. A family friend of ours is now 50, and her husband is 85 - actually, they only got married last year, but they have been together for about 20 years now.

Love is a complex thing, and expresses itself in many suprising ways. If they love each other, who are we to argue?

[papayahed]

I know a few couples like that, and they seem happy. A family friend of ours is now 50, and her husband is 85 - actually, they only got married last year, but they have been together for about 20 years now.

Love is a complex thing, and expresses itself in many suprising ways. If they love each other, who are we to argue?

True, but in one of their first interviews they mention a reality show it does make you wonder, no?

[Revolte]

I love these lads, my fiance is 17 1/2 so people like this make me seem like less of a creeper, yah know?

as for the age limit in spain being 12. aha! the jokes I can make..

[MarkBastable]

Of course, one could take the view that it's none of our goddam business.

[Lokasenna]

Of course, one could take the view that it's none of our goddam business.

That's true.

Academically speaking though, when do we draw the cut off? How much of a gap is too much? 10 years? 20? I'm curious as to what people think.

[Emil Miller]

That's true.

Academically speaking though, when do we draw the cut off? How much of a gap is too much? 10 years? 20? I'm curious as to what people think.

Each country sets its own laws in relation to this and that's fair enough. Females are naturally cautious about relationships with priapic young males but are usually more relaxed in the company of older men because young women can run faster.

[Buh4Bee]

Honestly, there has to be something wrong with this man. How can a sixteen year old fulfill the needs of such an old man? Sexually, most would assume there is no problem, but beyond that? Or better yet, this stunt is really good for her and her parent's career. This is great biography material for E! I'd love to bet on the divorce, if I were a gambling kind. I bet this girl isn't even gambling, the divorce is part of the story!!

[tonywalt]

A family member just met some a lady through a bride match service in the Philippines. He's 56 and she is 20 something.

He is extremely happy. I also know a friend's dad met a bride from Vietnam, and he's happy as a pig in a mud bath.

I am sure there are other stories, but those are my two observations. Well, there are a couple happy stories.

And Rupert 3rd wife, tremendous age difference there. I am not a big fan, but the age difference does not bother him one bit. He seems happy about the relationship.

I try to be positive about the idea.

[papayahed]

Hey fellas, would you be ok with it if it was your daughters?

[Buh4Bee]

Well, I'm talking longevity here, the marriage that is. Maybe I'm just too narrow minded, but what happens when these ladies grow up? Aren't they going to feel a sense of being deprived of something?

I have to admit that in some rare cases the connection is there, but in Hollywood?

Who can criticize you for wanting to be positive about such a set-up? I mean thirty five years, wow! (You can change their diapers and then in the end they can change your diapers.) What the heck? LOL!!! ;)

[tonywalt]

I will ask my two family members who married younger brides and get their opinion.

[Paulclem]

I don't see consenting adults with an age difference as a problem. A 16 year old is somewhat different. The sensible advice would be to wait a few years to see how it goes. Of course that wouldn't be in the bloke's interest.

[Revolte]

Hey fellas, would you be ok with it if it was your daughters?

I would if they were good for each other and no one was being used. The only real worry in this is the fact that they just aren't going to have a very long life together and I'm curious how well their energy (and lack of) is going to mix.

One thing we really shouldn't do is make the mistake of judging how grown up a person is based on their age, in a fantasy world it would work that way, but in this world it doesn't. A hard life can age a person fairly quickly.

Like I mentioned before my fiance is seventeen, I am twenty-two. While her age worries me from time to time (mostly because it's the most annoying stage of anyone's life, that half way to eighteen time frame, they just like to be jerks.) yet we are happy and everyone who has seen us together, including family and close friends are happy that we are with each other. The last girl I was "with" (it wasn't much more then sex, well one night of sex) was twenty-eight and as immature and over reactive as anyone I have ever met.

It all comes down to the people, culture is just culture and doesn't serve any importance to those who are not part of the culture that says what they are doing is wrong.

And lets be real here, conventional relationships seem to have a lot more drama then unconventional ones (just a generalization I maybe shouldn't make). Maybe because the unconventional ones are often driven from love and passion. Rather then societies desires, they act on their own.



Who can criticize you for wanting to be positive about such a set-up? I mean thirty five years, wow! (You can change their diapers and then in the end they can change your diapers.) What the heck? LOL!!! ;)

Sounds pretty sexy. I envy this man now.

[farnoosh]

I agree with Paulclem cause although i don't nessecarily think age difference is a problem but still 16 is too young to decide what your really looking for...you're so confused at that age that in my opinion you're only looking for someone to be there in like the next few hours.You don't really think about the future in that age,i say 20 years and up would be the right age to decide whether or not it's worth getting married and save the time for getting a divorce in that age!

[virgo27]

The brain and body are still developing at 16. With that in mind, does a 16 year old have the maturity to foresee what kind of complicated challenges living with some 35 years older than herself? I suppose that is why parents have to sign the papers.

[Paulclem]

The brain and body are still developing at 16. With that in mind, does a 16 year old have the maturity to foresee what kind of complicated challenges living with some 35 years older than herself? I suppose that is why parents have to sign the papers.

Agreed. Just think of all the crap decisions you'd have made at 16 given the opportunity...or was that just me?

[Ecurb]

That's true.

Academically speaking though, when do we draw the cut off? How much of a gap is too much? 10 years? 20? I'm curious as to what people think.

The adage I've heard is that you can reasonably date someone who is half your age + 7. So a 20-year-old can date a 17-year-old; a 30-year-old can date a 22-year-old, and an 80-year-old can date a 47-year-old. 14-year-olds can date other 14-year-olds and 10-year-olds can't date at all.

This is all arbitrary, of course -- but it's fun rule of thumb.

[Buh4Bee]

Here is an example of a successful long lasting relationship: Woody Allen and Soon-Yi Previn. She was 22 and he was 56- 34 year difference. They have been married for 15 years now and have adopted 2 children. So yes, it can work. However, Soon-Yi was a young adult by the time she married Allen.

[MarkBastable]

Agreed. Just think of all the crap decisions you'd have made at 16 given the opportunity...or was that just me?

It's possible it wasn't even you. In terms of this discussion, I think that your point is valid only if it can be shown that the older people get, the fewer crap decisions they make. And that's quite a difficult thing to do because:

a) what constitutes a crap decision tends to be defined by older people, who will generally consider their recent decisions not-crap

b) the further back in the past a decision is, the easier it is to consider it crap, so it may be that it's perceived crapness might be a function only of distance

c) older-you gets to judge the decisions of younger-you, but younger-you doesn't get to judge the decisions of older-you. If time went the other way, we might all think that no-one over thirty should be allowed to make any decisions, because they're all crap

d) whatever you decide, at whatever age, someone's going to think you're making a crap decision. When you're older people tend to keep that thought to themselves. But when you're young, everyone seems to think they have a right to tell you about it - from your parents (who do have that right) to old ladies at bus-stops and random politicians (who don't)

e) young people have to make a lot of decisions, so they're likely to screw a few up. Older people - established in a job, a relationship, a life - don't really have to make many decisions at all. If they did, they might discover they were no better at it at forty than they were at eighteen


I'm not saying that teenagers are fully-equipped to make all the decisions they need to make - they're not. But the bit they lack - experience - is not the be-all of decision-making. If it were, the older people get, the more good decisions they'd make. And I don't think that's the case.

[OrphanPip]

I don't think I could date someone under 21, I could sleep with someone under 21 though... I can be shallow sometimes.

[Vonny]

Each country sets its own laws in relation to this and that's fair enough. Females are naturally cautious about relationships with priapic young males but are usually more relaxed in the company of older men because young women can run faster.

This is funny because the first thought in my head, is, "Can he outrun me?" It may not be a literal thought, but I run 5 miles per day, and I wouldn't be interested in someone who couldn't outrun me. I want someone stronger and better than me, for some reason. There are many young men who can't run, and many much older ones who can.

So many young women today don't have fathers, and that creates a strong attraction to older men. I realized only recently, that that's gone on with me in the past. These relationships can work only for certain personality types, because it's not a relationship of equals. But I think with the right people, they can be strong relationships.

Generally speaking, for mature people, a 10-year age difference is about all that is comfortable, if the man is older. If the woman is older, the difference can't be more than about 4 years. What happens, if there's a 20-year gap, is that people have had very different life experiences and so they don't relate in the same way. If there's a 20 year gap, you are in different generations, and you grew up in different eras, and you wouldn't be peers.

And the bottom line is... the VAST majority of relationships simply don't work. Very few people can unite and appreciate each other based on common qualities anymore.

[MarkBastable]

And the bottom line is... the VAST majority of relationships simply don't work. Very few people can unite and appreciate each other based on common qualities anymore.

'Anymore'?

[Vonny]

'Anymore'?

Many people have grandparents who got married to someone down the street, or someone in church, and they had good marriages that lasted.

The man just needed to put some kind of roof over his family's head and bring home some food, and the woman did some gardening and cooked, and it was enough.

[MarkBastable]

Many people have grandparents who got married to someone down the street, or someone in church, and they had good marriages that lasted.


That didn't necessarily mean they got on, or that they had 'good' marriages. It might just mean that it was more difficult to split up. Who knows how many kids were screwed up more by their parents staying together than they would have been by the alternative?

I know, for instance, that my dad's childhood would have been a damn sight less unhappy if his dad hadn't been around.

[Lokasenna]

That didn't necessarily mean they got on, or that they had 'good' marriages.


That's true. I know of several couples, usually older people, who are married and have been for a long time, who absolutely loathe one another. The reasons for staying together are manifold: the inability to be financially independent, strong religious sentiment, the sake of the kids e.t.c.

[Delta40]

There is no accounting for the mentality and emotionality of people though. I know a guy whose entire youth was on the back burner due to ongoing illness. Now, in his mid forties, he behaves like a randy teenager, as if he was making up for lost time. He believes his adolescent mind was 'frozen' and it will take quite a while before he considers more mature options and consistent behaviour in relationships.

[LitNetIsGreat]

MarkBastable
young people have to make a lot of decisions, so they're likely to screw a few up. Older people - established in a job, a relationship, a life - don't really have to make many decisions at all. If they did, they might discover they were no better at it at forty than they were at eighteen

I think that's a bit of a generalisation. Even if you are established in a job and have a relationship/marriage etc there are still big decisions that you have to make all the time. Right now I'm thinking about mortgages, holidays and if we can afford it, about how the hell to get the kids to uni in 10 years time should they want to go, about whether to go down one or the other particular job route and the implications of those, how to get a three bedroom house in a better area etc, etc. My wife, I know, is facing a career crossroads and the weighing up taking an online degree. Pensions, planning for next year's holiday, thinking of rising bill costs etc, etc - these things are not light decisions. I know that I never had to face these sort of decisions at 17. Which pub we were going to was about the hardest thing.


I'm not saying that teenagers are fully-equipped to make all the decisions they need to make - they're not. But the bit they lack - experience - is not the be-all of decision-making. If it were, the older people get, the more good decisions they'd make. And I don't think that's the case.

I probably place more value on experience than you do. I think life experience is a valuable asset that you can't get from a textbook, and whereas it is not everything, I think that it it counts for a lot more than you imply.

As for the issue of the thread, I don't really know, I suppose it is up to them and I don't feel much either way about it. It doesn't outrage me at all.

[Buh4Bee]

There is no accounting for the mentality and emotionality of people though. I know a guy whose entire youth was on the back burner due to ongoing illness. Now, in his mid forties, he behaves like a randy teenager, as if he was making up for lost time. He believes his adolescent mind was 'frozen' and it will take quite a while before he considers more mature options and consistent behavior in relationships.

@ Delta- I have to agree with you here. I think that we can't assume that ALL people are a certain way, even if there is research that establishes certain norms. Maybe these people will go on to live a life together as Woody and Soon-Ye.

[Paulclem]

It's possible it wasn't even you. In terms of this discussion, I think that your point is valid only if it can be shown that the older people get, the fewer crap decisions they make. And that's quite a difficult thing to do because:

a) what constitutes a crap decision tends to be defined by older people, who will generally consider their recent decisions not-crap

b) the further back in the past a decision is, the easier it is to consider it crap, so it may be that it's perceived crapness might be a function only of distance

c) older-you gets to judge the decisions of younger-you, but younger-you doesn't get to judge the decisions of older-you. If time went the other way, we might all think that no-one over thirty should be allowed to make any decisions, because they're all crap

d) whatever you decide, at whatever age, someone's going to think you're making a crap decision. When you're older people tend to keep that thought to themselves. But when you're young, everyone seems to think they have a right to tell you about it - from your parents (who do have that right) to old ladies at bus-stops and random politicians (who don't)

e) young people have to make a lot of decisions, so they're likely to screw a few up. Older people - established in a job, a relationship, a life - don't really have to make many decisions at all. If they did, they might discover they were no better at it at forty than they were at eighteen


I'm not saying that teenagers are fully-equipped to make all the decisions they need to make - they're not. But the bit they lack - experience - is not the be-all of decision-making. If it were, the older people get, the more good decisions they'd make. And I don't think that's the case.

I understand and on the whole agree with what you're saying, but I did make a lot of crap decisions that were crap then, and are still crap now. Lots of my friends made the same kinds of crap decisions too.

I would advocate the thing that helps me as an older, aged and more experienced me to try to avoid the crappier end of my decision making - a little time to consider.

This, of course, is the thing that as an impetuous youth I didn't do, and most young uns won't do either in most of their decision making. I didn't, and most don't, make such life changing choices at that age though. I suppose it's the gravity of the decision that I was referring to. I'm quite aware that decisions need to be made, mistakes made and sorted and life moved on as a teen. Marriage to a bloke over three times her age takes a little consideration though.

[Delta40]

I don't think its only about crap decisions. The impulsiveness of youth can leave you breathless. What's a good idea today is obsolete tomorrow. Living in a space like that is no place to make a lifelong committment to an older man.

[stlukesguild]

In 1630, four years after the death of his first wife, the 53-year-old painter married 16-year-old Hélène Fourment. Hélène inspired the voluptuous figures in many of his paintings from the 1630s, including The Feast of Venus (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna), The Three Graces (Prado, Madrid) and The Judgment of Paris (Prado, Madrid). In the latter painting, which was made for the Spanish court, the artist's young wife was recognized by viewers in the figure of Venus. In an intimate portrait of her, Hélène Fourment in a Fur Wrap, also known as Het Pelsken (illustrated left), Rubens's wife is even partially modelled after classical sculptures of the Venus Pudica, such as the Medici Venus. Rubens died from gout on 30 May 1640. He was interred in Saint Jacob's church, Antwerp. The artist had eight children, three with Isabella and five with Hélène; his youngest child was born eight months after his death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Paul_Rubens

Rubens wrote letters to his close friends suggesting that he had elected to marry a far younger non-aristocratic girl as opposed to an established titled woman (he had been knighted several times and was the wealthy Lord of Steen) because he could not handle some aristocratic woman turning up her nose when he took his brushes in hand (Painting was a form of labor and thus beneath any aristocrat). Of course the girl he wed was considered by many to have been the most beautiful woman in Antwerp and the artist was clearly enamored of her physical charms:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6141/5979510219_55fb063211_b.jpg

The artist repeatedly portrayed his young wife, Helene, as Venus:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6005/5979510193_a044837a8c_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6132/5979510301_c3f345411b_b.jpg

It seems that Helene was no less enamored of her husband, initially refusing to allow him to employ any model other than herself... until she discovered just how mundane the act of modeling was.

Rubens painted his young wife more than any other person. He repeatedly portrayed her as the beautiful Lady of Steen... in her wedding gown:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6139/5980115298_88d13f7446.jpg

and as a proud mother:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6127/5980068382_2922b402a8_b.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6129/5980068358_53994e4af8_z.jpg

He even portrays her and one of the children strolling through the lush gardens of their estate hand in hand with her husband:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6010/5979510385_af410429dd_b.jpg

In one of his last paintings, The Garden of Love, Helene's likeness is recognizable is several figures, including the woman on the far left pushed by cupid toward her husband who faces us as he gazes into her eyes.

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6025/5979510749_0887927860_b.jpg

Perhaps as MarkBastable suggested, "one could take the view that it's none of our goddam business."

:smash:

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I've found people in general to be pretty stupid, regardless of age.

[Paulclem]

A 51 year old and a 16 year old. Who's going to get the most from that relationship? Yes there will be security and perhaps some wealth for the girl - I don't know if the bloke is wealthy or not. What is going to happen is that when she's 35 and still in her prime, he'll be 70 and in decline. She might be his carer. Of course he might be fit for a 70 year old and struggle on into his 80s and 90s through her late thirties and forties. That's if they're lucky.

As for children it depends when and if they have any. Their dad will be an old man whenever that might be. And if he does a Reubens and leaves her with a baby, then the kid will have no Father. Luckily for Reuben's wife, he was a rich bloke, given the kids they had.

Apart from the money aspect - which is admittedly a big factor for some people - I think the bloke wins on benefits. Given his experience, he'll know that. Given her lack of experience, she won't. That's the main problem I have. There's an unequal relationship which could merely be exploitation. Of course it could turn out just dandy. Given that a TV reality thing has been mentioned - I don't think so.

[Buh4Bee]

Yes, this guy is a Hollywood actor and has money.

[Paulclem]

Yes, this guy is a Hollywood actor and has money.


How would I feel if my daughter were in the same boat?

The money doesn't make it...nice.

If it works out in the lng run, then that's good - money or no.

If it doesn't work out then the girl is likely to come off richer, but perhaps having had an unpleasant experience, and she may become known - fairly or unfairly - as a gold digger. She's then known in a way that affects her, but not him. A bit like the difference in regards to Monica Lewinski and Clinton.

The negatives could be avoided by waiting without cancelling out the positives.

Who wins whether it works out or not? He does.

[Buh4Bee]

I completely agree with you Paul, I was just confirming that this guy does have money. Sorry to be confusing.

[Vonny]

A 16 year-old getting married isn't going to "work."

A mature woman who is young can marry a much older man and it can work, if she's been molded in a certain way.

I watched a series on DVD called The Darling Buds of May that had a gorgeous actress in it, Catherine Zeta Jones, and I heard that she's now married to an old man who has cancer, and she's having a nervous breakdown because she's in love with him.

Being a caregiver is very difficult at any age. If you're caring for someone who has loved you and strengthened you it would be easier than caring for someone who has tried to destroy you all of your life. Also, if you marry someone your age you can become a caretaker in your 70s. I read that most caregivers are 75 caring for someone who is 80, and I don't know how in the world they can do it. The advantage they have is they don't have to work full-time.

I think many young women appreciate the qualities of older men. (Not all older men, by any means, but some. I have a future Neely in mind. And I'm thinking of his reply to Mark.) Many young women sense what Neely is talking about. [Please, no ancient men p.m. me] Life experience is real and can be attractive. It isn't just money, if they have that. It's wanting someone who can make decisions, teach her something, and take care of her, and someone who has self-confidence and is stable. I'm sure the actress I'm talking about can take care of herself, so that probably isn't the correct choice of words here.

I know a couple of young women who have men their age, who they financially support. Their relationships are horendous. The guys treat them awful, and the worse the guys treat them, the more it turns them on. Also, the fact that these men are very stupid turns these women on. Both of these women had very doting fathers so I guess they want something different from what they know. I said to one of them, "What do you think about Dr. ?"(I won't say the doctor's name, but a different one than I talked about before.) And she said, "Oh he's so boring." And she puts this doctor down in other ways. I realized recently, that even when I was 14, I admired doctors who were 40 years old. I don't think it was their money, well, maybe a bit, but I wasn't attracted to other men who had money, such as actors, it was only men who had professions or talents that I admired - including doctors, and it was the fact that they could often just look at me and see what was wrong with me, and they could often fix it. I didn't admit it, but when I was 17 I had a crush on the 45 year-old surgeon who reconstructed my face. I thought, "How did he do that amazing work? How did he cut me to pieces and then put me back together so no one can even tell?" I don't know why it is, but to me the doctor is more physically attractive than the young abusive men. (I'm not saying that any doctor is attractive to me, just because he's a doctor. But occasionally a doctor is attractive to me. And an arrogant cocky self-centered man is never physically attractive to me, no matter what he looks like.) ...I think I've been conditioned in a way. I'm thinking of Pavlov who trained a little boy to be fearful of anything small, white and furry, by presenting a little white bunny to the boy and then giving the boy an electrical shock each time... So the men that many other women are attracted to, I'm not really afraid of, but they are ugly to me. I have no idea of Catherine's background but it's possible that this explains why she's crying over an ill old man when she could easily get another man.

Having said this, men have to be very careful. Young women can be very calculating and manipulative, and not as they appear. Often men will think, this young woman is too inexperienced to trick me. What they don't realize is that these young women are coached by their mothers every step of the way, in exactly how to catch a guy and just clean him out and dump him.

I think overall, marriage is like joining the military. It's just hell, and I want no part of it.

What I said in an earlier post about men providing and women cooking... I suppose I had the Mennonites in mind. People here probably don't know what I'm saying. Sometimes I see Mennonites, and I think that marriage is good. The women look very happy. They are often very beautiful, and they have a lot of self-confidence in the world. The Hutterites are different, usually dumpy looking, and something is wrong with that religion. Well, I shouldn't mention this because maybe other people haven't seen Mennonites.

Back to the 20 or 35 year age difference, I think a mistake men make is they go for a young woman because her body is better (with the exception of that lumpy 16 year-old in Luke's painting, who already looks as though she's delivered 6 children), but with that age difference, you aren't simply getting a woman who is young enough to withstand several more breast implantation surgeries before you die, you're getting a different kind of relationship than with a woman who is your age or 10 years difference, with 10 years there isn't a "younger woman." And if you get one who's mother has taught her the fine art of survival, of "having her cake and eating it too," well.... I think even some of those Asian women could fall into this category. My brother has said about (a certain nationality, not Asian, I won't say it because it could offend someone) that men get as mail-order brides, "I'd be afraid she'd slit my throat during the night."

[Emil Miller]

Vonny, any post about age differences in marriage that manages to take in Mennonites, Pavlov, and the Hutterites is far beyond my powers of comprehension. I do, however, agree with your assessment of Rembrandt's wife who more than amply fulfils the preference for fat women that seems to have obsessed the Dutch at that point in their history. Rubens is another painter with the same tendency, as his painting the 'Rape of the Sabine Women' shows and which always leaves me feeling sorry for the horses.

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/4016/productthumbf.jpg

[MarkBastable]

I'm starting to wish the moderators would put this thread out of its misery.

[Vonny]

I know what's coming when I mention those arrogant ugly men. Just one more thought occurred to me, so I'll try to quickly sneak this in.

I forgot about one of my favorite authors, Jill Ker Conway. I love Jill because she had a mother just like mine, (well, maybe not quite as bad) but she helped me to understand my mother. She married when she was about 28, to a man at least 20 years older, (maybe more, I can't remember.) He had one arm and was bi-polar, and she suffered along with him through his mental illness. She married him because he was brilliant.

The reason I want to mention this marriage is that it was truly equal. It's hard to say because she received a lot of guidance from her husband, which helped her to succeed in her career, but she was not in any way a "daughter" seeing him as a "father." She became the first woman president of Smith College. She is a feminist. She was also a distance runner, and her husband couldn't run, I just realized. He was unhealthy but Jill preserved him and he lived to be old. Now Jill is a widow, but she's fine.

I wanted to mention this because I realized that a great age gap doesn't mean that it has to be father/daughter.

[stlukesguild]

I think a mistake men make is they go for a young woman because her body is better (with the exception of that lumpy 16 year-old in Luke's painting, who already looks as though she's delivered 6 children)...

I do, however, agree with your assessment of Rembrandt's wife who more than amply fulfils the preference for fat women that seems to have obsessed the Dutch at that point in their history. Rubens is another painter with the same tendency, as his painting the 'Rape of the Sabine Women' shows and which always leaves me feeling sorry for the horses.

Emil... obviously the physical ideals for woman (or a man) vary from culture to culture and over time. One of the oldest, perhaps THE oldest sculptural representation of the human form, the Venus of Willendorf, would seem far from our ideal of a goddess. To the prehistoric man, however, she conveyed what was essential in a woman: well-fed and a body perfectly suited to bearing children. Rubens painted in an era of continual warfare centered often in his native Netherlands and in the Germany of his birth. His father had been a close aide of William of Orange who had been caught In flagrante delicto with Mrs. Orange. He was condemned to death, but this sentence was reduced to banishment after the personal pleadings (and sexual services) of Ruben's mother. Ruben's grew up in poverty and must have sworn, like Scarlet O' Hara, "I'll never be hungry again". He was from the very start one of the most driven artists.

His physical ideals certainly conveyed what must have then been an ideal of health:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6150/5983059950_df3b7e2207_b.jpg

For men, this meant muscularity and strength. For women this mean a voluptuousness suggestive of fecundity and the lack of want.

This ideal does not seem to have been limited to Rubens, although he was quite likely the greatest admirer an abundance of female flesh. As any number of critics have suggested, until Picasso, Renoir, and Rodin, no artist came near to rivaling Rubens as a voluptuary. One might do well to consider that the man single-handedly painted over 300 large-scale paintings (5x7' of larger was not uncommon... and many were far larger) as well as some 2000 paintings created with the assistance of his workshop (and this doesn't count the thousand of drawings, oil "sketches", tapestries, etc...); he mastered some 6 or 7 languages; he was an avid and much sought-after art collector, dealer, and adviser; he acted as a diplomat in the service of the Netherlands, France, Spain, and England, negotiating peace treaties between the three great European superpowers, and he still had time to father some eight children.

Throughout the Netherlands, Belgium and Holland we find the ideal similar... if not quite as opulent as Rubens:

Ceasar van Everdingen:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6024/5982498477_ab4617ae67.jpg

Jacob Jordaens:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6139/5982657105_de3a7ba075_b.jpg

The same can be found in Germany, as in the paintings of Johann Liss:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6022/5982498433_af7a1cbc12_b.jpg

Or in Italy, as in the paintings of Bernardo Strozzi:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6008/5983059854_095e1e362e_z.jpg

And even in Holland we find a similar ideal in Rembrandt:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6020/5982498611_6056ccf25f_z.jpg

The voluptuous look wasn't a universal ideal. In Spain we find something closer to our own ideal in the sole nude painting of Velasquez:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6131/5982498217_455b50889f_b.jpg

Of course the Spanish Inquisition would have involved a rejection of sensuality and voluptuousness... and Velasquez was only able to paint this single nude under the protection of the all-powerful Count-Duke of Olivares, in whose collection it was.

The English also had a far different ideal... going back to the waif-like, effete look of the Elizabethan period. Ruben's greatest pupil, Anthony van Dyck, created a tall, lean, elegant ideal figure that often stood some 9 or 10 heads high (as opposed to the average 8):

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6017/5982498509_72465af125_b.jpg

Interestingly enough, the more well-rounded ideal reappeared in the late-19th century where we find well-upholstered women are not uncommon in the paintings of Ingres...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6126/5983060178_4699f7be2c_b.jpg

Courbet...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6137/5983060292_3ca6345255_b.jpg

Renoir...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6004/5982498751_06cf101875_z.jpg

Maillol...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6134/5983063286_81e740898d_b.jpg

... whose nudes were based upon the reality of his much beloved model, Dina Vierny:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article5575343.ece

and certainly Degas...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6140/5982498709_30157e6255_b.jpg

... who adamantly argued against the academic ideals based upon Greco-Roman models, and insisted upon being true to the real Parisian girls... often short and stocky... who posed for him.

Even within more recent memory, you (Emil/Brian) must recognize that many of the Hollywood ideals of not long ago...

Marilyn Monroe...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6027/5982725935_cdc959e165.jpg

Jayne Mansfield...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6004/5982725953_c629c24400.jpg

and Ursula Andress...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6144/5982725989_30712b647f_b.jpg

... would all be considered "overweight" by the standards of today's fashion industry:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6007/5982726015_a2d8f060f5_z.jpg

[Vonny]

Thanks Luke, that's something I've really wondered about but was afraid to ask, I suppose. I wondered what was going on... were the models actually 50 years old, or did the painters have some type of problem, such as they really couldn't paint well, or what.

Well, the bottom body is obviously a media distortion, or perhaps she has a problem of some kind. I guess I won't make any further comment about that one. :rolleyes5:

Marilyn looks good. And Kate Winslet, in the movie Revolutionary Road, there's a scene where she's wearing a white dress and white gloves, and she fills the dress out very well. I think there's a female body that is normal and perfect, and it must be Kate's, in that movie anyway - maybe now she weighs 90 pounds, I don't know.

[Emil Miller]

Huge women are still in favour with painters it seems. This one by the late Lucien Freud was painted as recently as 1993 and makes Rubens females look positively sylph like. Apparently, she modelled for Freud on a number of occasions but now she has lost that occupation. However, if ever there is a remake of Moby Dick, she could apply for the title role.
Personally I prefer women to be waif like rather than elephantine. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but there is only so much that the eye can take in at any given time.


http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9632/painting2es468x271.jpg

[Delta40]

She used to be my avatar...

[Emil Miller]

Sometimes it simply isn't going to work out.

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/2066/53007018045b15575f7c.jpg

[Vonny]

Huge women are still in favour with painters it seems. This one by the late Lucien Freud was painted as recently as 1993 and makes Rubens females look positively sylph like. Apparently, she modelled for Freud on a number of occasions but now she has lost that occupation. However, if ever there is a remake of Moby Dick, she could apply for the title role.
Personally I prefer women to be waif like rather than elephantine. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but there is only so much that the eye can take in at any given time.


http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9632/painting2es468x271.jpg

Emil, you're going to put my eyes out with that. There should be a forum rule, that if you're going to put up a nude it needs to be Kate Winslet or better yet, a scene from the communal shower of the blue lagoon.

It's houseboat party season, even on Tuesday, I can't be held accountalble. Oh, it's taking me a while to figure out these spellings.

[BienvenuJDC]

OK....if you all are done with the ogling, let's get back to the original topic.

As a 38 year old man who is separated soon to be divorced, I have found an interest that is a few years younger. But I think that someone my age at least needs to find someone who is old enough to know what life is about. I'm getting to know the young lady in a very patient manner. However, she is 25 years old...I can't imagine someone too much younger. Although I wouldn't make a hard fast rule. Depending on the culture and the times, the age differences can vary. Some cultures taught their children to be adults much earlier....consider the pioneers. Girls of 15 or 16 were becoming housewives, bearing children, learning to take care of the homestead, butchering meat, baking, making clothing, and taking responsibilities that you wouldn't see a 30 year old take these days.

But as a father, I want my daughters to be able to make a mature decision about their relationships. I don't think that can happen until they have endured a bit about life. It's tough to make a blanket decision, but I'd hope that they will not take it lightly.

[stlukesguild]

Huge women are still in favour with painters it seems. This one by the late Lucien Freud was painted as recently as 1993 and makes Rubens females look positively sylph like. Apparently, she modelled for Freud on a number of occasions but now she has lost that occupation. However, if ever there is a remake of Moby Dick, she could apply for the title role.
Personally I prefer women to be waif like rather than elephantine. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but there is only so much that the eye can take in at any given time.

Freud is unique. As an artist his obsession was with flesh. Where Rubens may have been equally obsessed with flesh, in his case flesh conveyed sensuality, fecundity, youth, strength, nature, and certainly sexuality, with Freud flesh was flesh... meat... the imperfect human mortal form that ages, dies, and rots. There was a reason Robert Hughes called him the "Ingres of Existentialism". His close friend Francis Bacon had a similar obsession with human flesh as meat and repeatedly spoke of being endlessly fascinated by the butcher's shop... and almost shocked that all this flesh was on display... it was, as he suggested, almost pornographic.

Freud's obsession with flesh certainly did not reject the sexual... but there was often something disturbing or seedy to this (and one wouldn't expect less of the grandson of Sigmund Freud). Many of his female nudes were of lovers...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6026/6003655869_bf6de24b8d_z.jpg

But a great many were of family members... even daughters...

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6127/6004201680_85de4b6bac_z.jpg

Talk about your Oedipus Complex!

But Freud was just as likely to paint the male nude... and achieve something equally unsettling, as in this nude man with a rat:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6006/6004201750_916f2fbfb7.jpg

Or the same nude man posed with the artist's elderly mother:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6007/6004201832_6cfe9ecbd1.jpg

As the artist recognized his obsession with flesh, he began to seek out models that would allow him to explore a vast wealth of flesh. One of his favorite models was the huge performance artist, Leigh Bowery:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6022/6003656023_68dbdc5efc_z.jpg

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6128/6003656065_9f5d1049d0.jpg

Perhaps the greatest of these was of Bowery and his young wife... another frequent Freud model:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6142/6004201858_b43659d232.jpg

While Freud was focused upon the flesh, he did not really objectify the model to the extent of seeing the person as merely an object. Indeed, Freud rarely painted anyone he did not know and have some relationship with. When Freud agreed to paint the Queen, he spent months and endless hours talking to HRM. Almost all of Freud's models expressed the greatest fondness for the man. It was to Freud that Bowery's young wife first went when Leigh died suddenly. Sue, the huge female model in the painting you posted, admits that she cried uncontrollably upon hearing of Lucian's death.

I had the fortune to see almost all of these paintings in the great retrospective at the Met some years back. The paintings are phenomenal. The have a solidity that rivals Michelangelo and a painterly richness that suggests Rubens, Hals, and Rembrandt... filtered through Soutine, Van Gogh, and DeKonning.The contrast of the aesthetic beauty (the strength of the drawing, the solidity of the composition, and the sensuality of his paint handling) with the disturbing... and admitted "ugliness" of the imagery is what makes his work so unsettling. It is almost like a car crash... is which you can't look away in spite of the shock and horror.

[Vonny]

It is almost like a car crash... is which you can't look away in spite of the shock and horror.


It's very scary, like what's going on in the news. We'll be going into the death throes soon.

[Emil Miller]

Huge women are still in favour with painters it seems. This one by the late Lucien Freud was painted as recently as 1993 and makes Rubens females look positively sylph like. Apparently, she modelled for Freud on a number of occasions but now she has lost that occupation. However, if ever there is a remake of Moby Dick, she could apply for the title role.
Personally I prefer women to be waif like rather than elephantine. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but there is only so much that the eye can take in at any given time.

Freud is unique. As an artist his obsession was with flesh. Where Rubens may have been equally obsessed with flesh, in his case flesh conveyed sensuality, fecundity, youth, strength, nature, and certainly sexuality, with Freud flesh was flesh... meat... the imperfect human mortal form that ages, dies, and rots. There was a reason Robert Hughes called him the "Ingres of Existentialism". His close friend Francis Bacon had a similar obsession with human flesh as meat and repeatedly spoke of being endlessly fascinated by the butcher's shop... and almost shocked that all this flesh was on display... it was, as he suggested, almost pornographic.

Freud's obsession with flesh certainly did not reject the sexual... but there was often something disturbing or seedy to this (and one wouldn't expect less of the grandson of Sigmund Freud). Many of his female nudes were of lovers...


While Freud was focused upon the flesh, he did not really objectify the model to the extent of seeing the person as merely an object. Indeed, Freud rarely painted anyone he did not know and have some relationship with. When Freud agreed to paint the Queen, he spent months and endless hours talking to HRM. Almost all of Freud's models expressed the greatest fondness for the man. It was to Freud that Bowery's young wife first went when Leigh died suddenly. Sue, the huge female model in the painting you posted, admits that she cried uncontrollably upon hearing of Lucian's death.

I had the fortune to see almost all of these paintings in the great retrospective at the Met some years back. The paintings are phenomenal. The have a solidity that rivals Michelangelo and a painterly richness that suggests Rubens, Hals, and Rembrandt... filtered through Soutine, Van Gogh, and DeKonning.The contrast of the aesthetic beauty (the strength of the drawing, the solidity of the composition, and the sensuality of his paint handling) with the disturbing... and admitted "ugliness" of the imagery is what makes his work so unsettling. It is almost like a car crash... is which you can't look away in spite of the shock and horror.

His portrait of the Queen turned out to be rather small and concentrated on showing her hands as being very wrinkled. I suspect that, like Graham Sutherland's portrait of Somerset Maugham at the Tate Britain, it has been confined to the basement or 'donated' to the National Portrait Gallery.
If you think that Freud's paintings are meaty, Stanley Spencer's don't bear thinking about.
I shall refrain from posting them because this thread is already hovering on the brink of closure.

[Vonny]

His portrait of the Queen turned out to be rather small and concentrated on showing her hands as being very wrinkled. I suspect that, like Graham Sutherland's portrait of Somerset Maugham at the Tate Britain, it has been confined to the basement or 'donated' to the National Portrait Gallery.
If you think that Freud's paintings are meaty, Stanley Spencer's don't bear thinking about.
I shall refrain from posting them because this thread is already hovering on the brink of closure.

I see humor in you Emil. You make my heart feel lighter. There's a subtle difference that I can't quite put my finger on.

I just realized that I forgot to include my brother David in my list of heroes. He doesn't like laws, lawsuits and so forth. We need only personal responsibility, and traits which have been lost today, such as tact. Guns keep people polite, and so if my father decides to come around us again, we need to keep him polite. You don't have guns in England, and although you do have London to contend with, maybe you don't need them so much.

Somehow, all of the car crashes that I see around me tie together. My brother sold his motorcycle because cars don't respect motorcycles - they just pull out in front of you - and with the increase in traffic, you're really likely to be splattered now. It's too bad, no more motorcycle trips, but that's our world now.

Maybe I should add that there is humor intended in this post.

[Emil Miller]

I see humor in you Emil. You make my heart feel lighter. There's a subtle difference that I can't quite put my finger on.

Maybe I should add that there is humor intended in this post.

Vonny, anything that makes your heart feel lighter is fine by me. People who have no sense of humour are to be pitied; I honestly don't know how it's possible to live without one.

[stlukesguild]

If you think that Freud's paintings are meaty, Stanley Spencer's don't bear thinking about.
I shall refrain from posting them because this thread is already hovering on the brink of closure.

Oh, I know Spencer's paintings quite well. The so-called "leg o' lamb" painting of himself and his wife nude is rather infamous. Strangely he only painted a few works in this manner. Most of the rest of his oeuvre was in a highly stylized figurative narrative manner... a cross between Gauguin and earl Renaissance painting... or a sort of hyper-realistic landscape painting.

[Vonny]

How would I feel if my daughter were in the same boat?

The money doesn't make it...nice.

If it works out in the lng run, then that's good - money or no.

If it doesn't work out then the girl is likely to come off richer, but perhaps having had an unpleasant experience, and she may become known - fairly or unfairly - as a gold digger. She's then known in a way that affects her, but not him. A bit like the difference in regards to Monica Lewinski and Clinton.

The negatives could be avoided by waiting without cancelling out the positives.

Who wins whether it works out or not? He does.


I wonder what the real reason is that this guy is seen as having b---s (that word for male power?)

Thing is, he gave the other side just exactly what they were looking for. What benefit came from what he did? He may have had the right to do what he did, but it sure resulted in a great distraction from what really mattered, and the fact is that there are morality conscious people that he also represented along with the porn faction. How might it have been different if he'd refrained? Because the person who followed him (who he handed it over to) has been our total destruction.

I don't see it as that big a deal what he personally did, but he should've known that given the climate at that time, he could get exposed. It was weak.

The other thing is - I don't know the details of this story, or much about Monica - but didn't she have mental illness? I guess this does bother me, if he jumped on an ill woman.

[Emil Miller]

If you think that Freud's paintings are meaty, Stanley Spencer's don't bear thinking about.
I shall refrain from posting them because this thread is already hovering on the brink of closure.

Oh, I know Spencer's paintings quite well. The so-called "leg o' lamb" painting of himself and his wife nude is rather infamous. Strangely he only painted a few works in this manner. Most of the rest of his oeuvre was in a highly stylized figurative narrative manner... a cross between Gauguin and earl Renaissance painting... or a sort of hyper-realistic landscape painting.

That sounds a fairly accurate description of his work. He was an eccentric character who lived in Cookham, a very picturesque English village and he is much admired as a peculiarly colloquial painter who is exhibited in major galleries in England. As an Englishman (for what that's worth) I find his paintings peculiarly relevant despite their often blunt religiosity.