I think this shit is really absurd, in todays world it makes sense for their being a large age gap.
If a girl is over thirty, any plans to have kids is gonna be risky, unless you have kids 2 years into the relationship.
With the pressure for the dude to be financially established these days it makes more and more sense for the guy to be much older.
As a chick shouldn`t have kids past 32-33, and dude should have kids until he has a way to provide(divorce stats back that shit up)
Sure it`s all sex at the beginning but she`ll mature as the relationship matures.
I really think this will be the norm in the not too distant future.
I actually disagree.
I believe the norm will be the reverse.
Economic trends show that a woman is unable to make up lost wages due to maternity leave to care for children, in her lifetime. The stigma (however it falls, both obvious and more nebulous) associated to women who are viewed as "abandoning their post in the workplace" to care for children is alive and well. Companies foster policies that seek to convince women that they support the familial structure, but their actions towards these demonstrate their true perceptions on the issue. Women are unfairly punished in the workplace for birthing children. It's is an economic fact that is undeniable.
Now, contrast that with the statistics showing that more post-secondary graduates are women. The workplace is flooded with more and more women. Women who need a return on that educational investment. Therefore, driving the need to excel in the workplace and be relevant. One must actually be at work (and not home caring for children) if one is to grasp the promotional opportunities afforded at work. No one gets promoted on mat leave, so to speak.
So now we must reconcile the above. Clearly, there's pressure on women to stay in school, and then stay at work. Which leaves little time to find a mate, or mate with him to produce offspring. And the economics of a man taking paternity leave are far more dire than for women. The workplace has yet to believe it as acceptable for men to leave to raise children than women. Such is the state of our economy and workplace mores.
So women will seek a mate, and seek to mate with that mate, later in life. These will be women of prestige, power, and personal wealth and independence. They will not be dependent on a man to support them. As such, men will be chosen for their genetic potential with greater emphasis than ever before. With women holding the balance of power (in totality) in the workplace and economically, men can effectively be distilled down to their physical contributions to the offspring. And clearly, here, a younger male would prove more desirable. Not only as a trinket for the well-to-do-woman, but also for his stamina, strength and physical appearance.
Younger women don't want kids, and can't afford to have them. They'll have them when they get older. And they'll choose younger men to do it with.
Coo-coo-ca-choo, Mrs. Robinson.