What women want

I AM puzzled by the behaviour of women. Not all, just those in the partnering phase of the life cycle. I am puzzled as to why modern women marry older men.

cake

I AM puzzled by the behaviour of women. Not all women. Just women in the partnering phase of the life cycle. I am puzzled as to why modern women marry older men

Now I know as soon as I say this female readers will immediately declare that they know heaps of women who have married younger men. And that may be so. But such women are an anomaly. And the reason why I know this is because a riveting statistical bulletin published late last year by the Australian Bureau of Statistics confirmed the fact.

The median age at first marriage for modern Australian women, generation Y women, is now 28 whereas for men this figure is 30. Women marry men exactly two years older. Don't you find that interesting? I do. Why on earth would a woman marry an older man? It's so inefficient. The average lifespan of a man is 79 whereas for a woman it's 82. So if a woman marries a man two years older she is condemning herself to five years of widowhood later in life. That is unless she plans on "playing the field" from 77. (This is not a sentence that you really want to think about too much.)

Modern women are more likely to be tertiary educated than men; they can work out which phone plan best meets their needs; they can juggle 10 things at once.

So why can't women work out that younger men offer better longevity value? After all men have been doing the reverse for thousands of years.

I have questioned women on this subject and they say it's not that they are choosing older men, it's that older men are choosing younger women. But I don't buy this argument.

Women may still struggle with men for economic, social and political power, but when it comes to the decision to marry someone, it is the woman who says yes or no.

But again this is not why I am puzzled by women's behaviour. It is the fact that in 1971 the average age at first marriage for an Australian woman was 21, whereas for a man it was 23.

Baby boomer women also selected older men. But I can understand why this might have been so. Forty years ago women did not have access to tertiary education, or to the career options they have today. At that time women still depended on men for "protection and support". And since older men are more likely to be better established in their careers than younger men, women were quite naturally drawn to partners two years older.

Surely after four decades of liberation, of women taking up their right to tertiary education and professional careers, there is no longer a predisposition for women to look for the support of an older male? Surely the final step in the emancipation of women is the cultural freedom to choose a partner who, from an actuarial point of view, best suits their needs?

Ladies, dump that partner prospect two years older (he will bring you five years of grief in your mid-70s) and look for something a little younger. You don't need an older male to protect or to provide for you. You don't need someone who earns as much as you or who is taller than you. This Valentine's Day take a closer look at men who are shorter, less educated, and who are three years younger. That way you can proudly project your independence from the Byzantine social mores that governed female partner selection for millennia. And as a side benefit you also have a better chance of dying in the same year as your partner. What could be more romantic or efficient?

KPMG Partner Bernard Salt is now on Facebook/BernardSaltDemographer and twitter.com/bernardsalt; [e-mail]