Aging lies at the intersection of genetics and environment, which implies that 1) not everyone ages at the same rate, and 2) by optimizing the environment your body operates in (e.g., optimizing sleep, exercise, nutrition, supplements, and drugs ), you can optimize regeneration/repair and effectively slow the rate of aging. I’m lucky enough to have really good genetics for aging and I take exceptional care of myself, optimizing the above parameters, including the use of rapamycin. I have a long line of ancestors that have lived well into their 90s, even back in the 1700s, so I think there is a good chance my corpse will hold out long enough to see my offspring into adulthood.

Meh, once someone is over thirty they’ve typically done enough adulting that the “half your age plus 7” metric isn’t really necessary. There isn’t a power or maturity imbalance, and I’m inclined to think that such women are capable of evaluating the pros and cons of dating me. My current best prospect is a M.D. that is 35.

Thank you for commenting. I always appreciate feedback. I’d honestly prefer to date someone a bit closer to my age, as it’s easier to have things in common. However, I’m exceptionally fit (my VO2max is 52), most of my friends are in their mid-40s, I’m very active, and have a couple of genetic SNPs associated with longevity, which I credit with how well I have aged. Most people guess that I’m in my mid 40s, and are shocked to learn my actual age. I’m also fortunate enough to be well-educated, financially stable, and reasonably good looking, so I am able to attract the women I’m interested in. FWIW, I would consider women as young as 25 hypothetically, but in reality I think it’s unlikely that I’d find the type of connection I’m seeking with someone that age. Realistically, 30 is probably my lower limit.

As a 60 year old man that dates women in their mid-30s (I want children), I feel this post-it note.

RealID is insufficient to confirm citizenship, yet a facial recognition app that is known to make errors is “definitive”? Sounds like racist bullshit to me.

“If," [“the management consultant”] said tersely, “we could for a moment move on to the subject of fiscal policy. . .” “Fiscal policy!" whooped Ford Prefect. “Fiscal policy!" The management consultant gave him a look that only a lungfish could have copied. “Fiscal policy. . .” he repeated, “that is what I said.” “How can you have money,” demanded Ford, “if none of you actually produces anything? It doesn’t grow on trees you know.” “If you would allow me to continue… .” Ford nodded dejectedly. “Thank you. Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt the leaf as legal tender, we have, of course, all become immensely rich.” Ford stared in disbelief at the crowd who were murmuring appreciatively at this and greedily fingering the wads of leaves with which their track suits were stuffed. “But we have also,” continued the management consultant, “run into a small inflation problem on account of the high level of leaf availability, which means that, I gather, the current going rate has something like three deciduous forests buying one ship’s peanut." Murmurs of alarm came from the crowd. The management consultant waved them down. “So in order to obviate this problem,” he continued, “and effectively revalue the leaf, we are about to embark on a massive defoliation campaign, and. . .er, burn down all the forests. I think you’ll all agree that’s a sensible move under the circumstances." The crowd seemed a little uncertain about this for a second or two until someone pointed out how much this would increase the value of the leaves in their pockets whereupon they let out whoops of delight and gave the management consultant a standing ovation. The accountants among them looked forward to a profitable autumn aloft and it got an appreciative round from the crowd.”

― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe