HA! ;) And also blow up the mega-herd :D

She's kissed Daryl already as shown in the picture.
I don't know what "Drop the mic" is supposed to mean?

Why, oh why, didn't they just blow up the mega herd while they were still in that pit?! That's what I was thinking the entire time! Just throw a bomb down there and take them out before releasing them!

I guess drop the mic means like, not do anything else because she's already done so much already (that's how it looked like when Chris Harwick explained it)

Also the 'Finally kiss Daryl' was referring to an actual kiss lol.

I interpreted "Drop the mic" as bitch-slapping someone like Rick with some real cold-hard truths. Like really brutally let him know what a fuck-face he is. I don't watch The Talking Dead, so I dunno. I'm sticking with my interpretation.

Oh sorry, she's like a mom to him so I wasn't thinking that way.

^Agree to disagree on that one....

^ Not sure what you are talking about. I have heard on Talking Dead many times that Carol is like a mom to Daryl. Didn't you say yourself that they connected because they both experienced abuse and that Carol was kind of like the mom that Daryl lost and Daryl like Sophia who Carol lost? Also she is much older than him and greatly unrealistic for a romance to develop between them and I think most viewers wouldn't want to see that anyways because it would look much like a mom and son.

My experience of the TWD fandom has been the opposite: I've mostly seen people shipping them romantically. I've never heard anyone really talk about them in a mother/son way. Personally, I just like the way they interact with each other and have never cared to label it anything. I think people see what they want to see in it.

No I never said that, I said that about Carl and Carol. The connection between Carol and Daryl is on a deeper level. Also they are about the same age, both in their 40s, it's not because she has grey hair that she's too old for him that's just agist! And the mom comment has been shut down by Norman on several occasions also and on Talking Dead they always talk about a romance, not a parent/child relationship. And most viewers have been wanting this since season two, so no it'd wouldn't be weird, it would make a sense.

I don't want to start an argument on shipping here, because it's not really the place, so I'll just stop here.

misanthrope86: Wow that is really interesting, thank you for sharing that. I didn't know anyone could possibly see them in a romantic way to be honest. :)

Bibi69: My mistake about Carl not Daryl. Carol is older than Daryl so that's why I said she's too old for him, not because of his grey hair! It's not agist, it's statistics! I'm sorry for caring about keeping the divorce rate and unrealistic expectations low. :) On Talking Dead, I know CM Punk said they were more like a parent/child relationship and I know when the host asked Carol and Daryl, they seemed to be shocked like I was and think it was kind of funny as a joke, not take it seriously. I have never heard that "most viewers" have been wanting this since season 2 and never seen anything from the producers or anything on it so sorry if I come from a different background/opinion, I wasn't trying to offend. :)

She is barely older than him. The actors almost have the same age. Melissa is 50 and Norman is going on 47. That's really not a big age difference. Same with the characters, Carol is probably around 45 and Daryl is just a bit older than 40, like 42 maybe. Not a big age difference either. It's just because Norman dyes his hair that people think he's younger, but if you look at his face, you can see he's almost 50.

Bibi69: I understand what you are saying, but I was merely coming from a point of statistics which prove that a woman being the same exact age as her husband has a high rate of divorce and once the woman is older by 1+yrs, the divorce rate goes up exponentially. That is why her being a few years older, compared to male/female age differences is really like her being several years older. (Women do have a high rate of being more mature than men their own age.) That is why I think at least most men don't see any romance connection there and I believe the "Carol/Daryl romance fandom" is mainly full of women who don't realize those statistics. :)

Wow... *blinks*

Alright. Whatever. But personally, most men I know in my personal life have life partners that are older then them, some of them even close to 10 years older than them and they've been together for a really long time, have kids and are really happy together. Also, I've been hit on by mostly guys who are younger than me. So to me 3 to 4 years, especially when you're 40+, is really not that big of a difference. Also, I do not believe in statistics.

AND, in a zombie apocalypse, I'm pretty sure they don't give a rat's ass about divorce statistics. They love each other and that's all it matters. It's not like they actually have like 10 years in front of them either, in that kind of world, you live in the present moment, because you could die tomorrow.

^ That's fine. Nobody is trying to debate your personal experiences whatsoever. I am just talking about statistics, proven by math and science. Most couples where the woman is older ends in divorce or the man cheats a lot. I'm sorry you do not believe in evidence and facts. And I wasn't talking about "people who have partners that are older than them", I was specifically talking about relationships where the female is older than the male. In relationships where the man is older, the results are opposite and they have a very low rate of divorce and cheating etc.

I doubt they love each other. They don't have to care about statistics as most people don't yet the statistics don't lie. Statistically they don't love each other and never would love each other for 10 years or more. Sure they might have lust for each other for a night because they need a specific kind of release and time is too short to court and date etc. but that doesn't equal love. :) I'm just coming from a realistic point of view here, not fantasy, sorry.

Condescension aside, can you please link us to these statistics?

^ I don't know what you mean by condescension as I wasn't being condescending at all. I simply was letting you know where I was coming from and why my opinion was, what it was. I'd love to hear your explanation for how I was being "condescending" when I wasn't? Just because my opinion is different than yours doesn't automatically make me a bad person and I don't appreciate your accusations. I don't have a fantasy for Carol and Daryl which is why I say I am coming from a realistic point of view here, not fantasy, as I have no personal feelings in this and am only thinking about what is more realistic and possible. Since this show, aside from zombies, does care about statistics and trying to be as realistic as possible, I don't see how you can get so offended at my simple opinion and call it condescending when it's just not.

Here are the statistics you asked for and can you please drop the unnecessary and incorrect accusations towards me with your next comments?

"Psychologists then analyzed the importance of each factor to build up profiles of an ideal marriage and a nightmare couple. With age, they found that if the wife is five or more years older than her husband, they are more than three times as likely to divorce than if they were the same age. Couples where the wife is five or more years younger than the husband are the least likely to hit trouble, with their divorce rate six times less."
(link)

"If you're a woman two or more years older than your husband, your marriage is 53 percent more likely to end in divorce than if he was one year younger to three years older." (link)

"A recent research at the University of Vienna says that the most successful marriages are those where the man is four to six years older than the woman. After going through a database of more than 10,000 men and women, the study concluded that this age difference is ideal for the couple as it carries a reproductive advantage." (link)

"A British psychological study published in Evolution and Human Behavior in 2010 concluded that men and women, in general, continued to follow traditional gender roles when searching for mates. The study found that, as supported by other academic studies, most men preferred younger, physically attractive women, while most women, of any age, preferred successful, established men their age or older. The study found very few instances of older women pursuing much younger men and vice versa." (link)

Additionally, men marry women more around their age or older the first time but it's far more rare the second time as they've learned their lesson that it doesn't work. This helps their second marriages be more successful.
"Not only are men who have recently remarried more likely than those beginning a first marriage to have a spouse who is younger; in many cases, she is much younger. " (link)

I believe that women are smart and capable and they will do the best when they have all the facts. It is not condescending for me to share facts. How can I know what facts you are up to date on and which ones you are not? I try to help women by letting them know what they're dealing with so they're not blindsided later. So again, I'd love to know how you found me to be "condescending" please.

Interesting... I didn't say you were a bad person...

Condescension:
"I believe the "Carol/Daryl romance fandom" is mainly full of women who don't realize those statistics. :)"
"I'm sorry you do not believe in evidence and facts."
"I'm just coming from a realistic point of view here, not fantasy, sorry."
"I believe that women are smart and capable and they will do the best when they have all the facts."
"How can I know what facts you are up to date on and which ones you are not?"

First up, when people ask for studies, they mean the actual studies. The Daily Mail, The Daily Beast and Wikipedia are not academic sources. They dumb down the official studies, picking out nuggets of information, then decontextualize them for the masses to consume.

Case and point, the research discusses in the Daily Mail link is from a single study using data from a 1999 study of heterosexual Swiss couples that looked at how a variety of factors interplay and concluded that the interplay is what is important and that the relative importance of these factors shifts over time. The "optimization" they come up with is essentially similar to the algorithms relationship matching sites use. You'll note that the paper cites in it's literature review multiple other research projects that discuss the multiple factors that contribute to relationship sustainability. None of the authors of this study are psychologists. They are in mathematics, management/marketing or sociology.

The research from the Daily Beast link is from Australia, and again discusses the interplay of multiple factors. If you read the section in which the authors specifically discuss age differences, you will see socio-cultural factors are implicated here, so how age works in the relationship is important. You'll also note they used 2 different models to run the data, with only one of the models consistently yielding statistically significant results.

The research in the Sulekha.Com link is not identified and is thus not credible at all.

The research referenced in the Wikipedia link is a study about online dating preferences, not the longevity of romantic relationships.

The Pew Research contradicts the other research you've cited, as it discusses men re-marrying younger women. The other research projects suggested that people who were similar ages were best matched. This research also suggests that women are more likely to marry a younger man when it is their second marriage. How many times has Carol been married...? XD

Nothing you have presented here is fact. And it is bad scientific practice to call any of these findings facts. This kind of research changes constantly over time, which one of the studies actually explicitly points out. These findings support hypotheses in their research context.
Quantitative, statistical research is performed from a particular perspective. This perspective makes assumptions about the world, such as romantic relationships can be quantified. But even if you love stats research, these projects also contradict each other. They do not include adequate cross-sections of the population, and they ignore the most glaring gendered issues, which you have inadvertently brought up here. There is a social stigma about older women dating younger men. The question we need to be asking, if you care about what these statistical studies may suggest, is why would a relationship between an older woman and a younger man be less likely to last? This is a gendered question, and it is an important one.

*link* I love you!

misanthrope86: Since you obviously don't know what condescending means, now I will talk to you in a condescending manner so that you might actually know the difference and stop making ignorant accusations. It's not interesting at all unless you don't understand language, you were clearly trying to infer I was a bad person by accusing me of being condescending when I wasn't. You may not understand the definition or application of the word "condescending" but you knew enough about it to know it was insult so stop the act.

None of what you pointed out was condescension at all, you just didn't like it or the way it made you feel because you are sensitive not mature. Grow up. I had already explained to you where I was coming from and it couldn't have been condescending because it would have to have been put in a manner that showed a lack of respect even though I was clearly trying to be as respectful as I could while still providing new information. You're a big girl aren't you? Learn the definitions of words before you use them and stop getting so emotional about inconvenient truths.

First up, you have no statistics to prove the other way so I don't know what makes you think you have proved anything. I wouldn't even say nice try because I think it's pathetic you spent so much time and effort trying to debunk something that is obvious.

Just because you went on a rant with your comment didn't make anything you said true.

Clearly you don't know what the term "social stigma" means either because there are NO social stigmas against older women dating younger men. Quite oppositely, it is shown to be more common and more successful in media than in real life and people don't treat a couple badly when the woman is much older. You have no idea what you are talking about. People just don't like it because they think it is gross, that's not a social stigma. The real social stigma is when older men date younger women as older single women, usually around your age because your clock is ticking, get emotional like you just did and treat the couple bad because they're mad that they are older than that chick yet still single.

You ask "why would a relationship between an older woman and a younger man be less likely to last?" That one is not an important one, it's an obvious one: Men aren't physically or sexually attracted to older women. That simple. There is your real condescension.

misanthrope86: And one more thing, if you had preferred I use personal analogies which really mean nothing in the larger scale of things, then fine. I have never personally seen any younger man with an older woman who wasn't A) using her to pretend he wasn't gay, or b) using her because he didn't want to get a job and he knew if she was desperate enough to date younger men then she was desperate enough to pay for him and/or c) he just needed sex that was easy to get since younger and more attractive women are harder for him to bed.

link, B?

link ;)

Thanks for that laugh. I needed that.

You are right, this is not interesting: it is absolutely fascinating. I was inferring that you were being condescending. Condescension is not necessarily an indicator of a "good" or "bad" person, at least not in my world...
Here are some definitions of condescension:
link
link
And here's one from your favourite non-source, Wikipedia (please note, that previous sentence was condescending. I'm ok with it):
link
The comments of yours that I mentioned in my previous comment are perfect examples of condescension. You position yourself as the knower of "facts" and those who don't agree with these "facts" un-knowledgeable fantasists. I have interpreted your comments this way. Bibi interpreted your comments this way. Your comments were condescending.

I absolutely will not stop call your condescension condescending, especially as you seem to have no interest in admitting to it being condescension. I have no problem being impolite to impolite people, no matter how much they demand I tolerate their rudeness. Karma is a bitch, eh? Please show me where you were trying to be respectful, because I can't see it. I can't see it anywhere. Help me out.

You explained where you were coming from was poor science, or rather the poor rehashing and misinterpreting of science. Nothing you provided here is new information. It is old information, re-hashed, appropriated in soundbites for the masses. Are you saying that I am being disrespectful for not accepting Wikipedia and pop media articles as robust evidence...?

"First up, you have no statistics to prove the other way so I don't know what makes you think you have proved anything."
- I don't have to, because I am critically reviewing your evidence that you claimed was factual. I demonstrated how the research projects were misinterpreted by pop-media and contradicted each other. I demonstrated how they told other stories that shifted the meaning of the data. That is exactly how I am expected to respond to your claims. You made the claims, I countered them.

I have never made any claims about this issue, other than my responses to your so-called evidence. You'll note I have not actually shared an opinion on the matter, other than my question at the end of my previous comment, which should give you a massive hint as to what my position might be.

Emotional? Do you know what projection is?

"Just because you went on a rant with your comment didn't make anything you said true."
- Just because you strongly hold a belief doesn't make it fact. But if you would like to counter my claims about the research you suggested (the actual research, not the Wikipedia etc links), then please do. I note here that you haven't...

"Quite oppositely, it is shown to be more common and more successful in media than in real life and people don't treat a couple badly when the woman is much older."
- This is the kind of claim you need to support with some evidence. Have I not made myself clear here?

"The real social stigma is when older men date younger women as older single women, usually around your age because your clock is ticking, get emotional like you just did and treat the couple bad because they're mad their older than that chick yet still single."
- Please research 'projection'. Anyone reading this, please research 'projection'. Give yourself a lol.
Also, please share some research about this "real social stigma". I tried to find some, but I couldn't.

Social stigma/Older Women/Younger Men:
link
Chapter Two - A Woman's Aging Body: Friend or Foe? in the book 'Psychotherapy and Counseling With Older Women: Cross-Cultural, Family, and End-of-Life Issues' by Frances Trotman and Claire Brody.
link
link
link
link
link - PhD thesis that pulls together some nice stuff
link
link

More general research on ageism, including gendered ageism:
'Women, Aging, and Ageism' by Evelyn Rosenthal (book)
'Look Me in the Eye: Old Women, Aging and Ageism' by Barbara Mcdonald and Cynthia Rich (book)
link
link
link
link
link
'Ageism: Stereotyping and Prejudice Against Older Persons' by Todd Nelson (book)
link

"Men aren't physically or sexually attracted to older women."
- Please cite your sources. Why not? Do you think young women are physically and sexually attracted to older men?

"And one more thing, if you had preferred I use personal analogies which really mean nothing in the larger scale of things, then fine. I have never personally seen any younger man with an older woman who wasn't A) using her to pretend he wasn't gay, or b) using her because he didn't want to get a job and he knew if she was desperate enough to date younger men then she was desperate enough to pay for him and/or c) he just needed sex that was easy to get since younger and more attractive women are harder for him to bed."
- Gosh, I'm so glad you added this extra gem.
Firstly, so when you say "fact", you mean "in my experience", correct? Because, for the record, I don't care if you bring up your personal experiences or observations. That is your business. The problem is that you are equating your personal experiences and observations with fact, and then getting uppity when someone dares to question that.
Secondly, in my experience, women who marry older men do so for a) money, b) social status, or c) because the man is manipulative and controlling. <-- This statement is completely untrue, but is designed to reflect the close-minded, damaging ignorance of your comment. Observe what you will, but don't pretend that your view isn't tinted in a particular colour.

Anyways, gotta go! I hear my clock ticking! Gotta take it back to the misogynist shop it came from!

"Men aren't physically or sexually attracted to older women."

Excuse me, I know plenty of men who would disagree on that one! Your statement is an opinion, NOT a fact!

misanthrope86: Since you clearly whine and complain because you so need me to respond to you and cry if I don't:

I consider someone like you, who is condescending to strangers to be a bad person and there are many people who agree with that.

Wikipedia is not my favorite source but thanks for the sarcasm! Real sign that you actually have something productive to say. I can tell why you joined feminism....

When I know facts, it's not wrong of me to tell others "this is what I know". Sorry I dont live in the same society as you where everyone pretends to be dumb because you tear people down for sharing new information.

You guys interpreted my comments that way because you both emotionally didn't like what I said. That's not my fault and your guys' interpretation doesn't make it so. Just because you think so highly of yourself and that person doesn't actually make you guys the definers of what is and isn't condescending. I tried to be as polite as I possibly could but you couldn't care less because you just didn't emotionally like it, and that's all.

I don't know if karma is a bitch, why don't you tell me since you're the only one here?

This has nothing to do with my beliefs at all and it's really pathetic that you cant get that out of your head. Statistics prove that most men are not physically or sexually attracted to older women. That's a fact not an opinion. Why do you think they made Viagra? Hello, for older men to have sex with their older wives. Men who have sex with younger women don't need it as much. It's seriously common sense and it's amusing that you even needed the statistics.

Have I not made myself clear here? You're not my dog and I'm not going to throw you any bones so stop asking. You're online and if you want to proactively deny the truth then that is on you. The fact of the matter is, the media does show couples of older women with younger men more often than it occurs in real life on TV and I'm sorry if the TV is your bible that you don't question.

I'm sure many people are reading this and laughing at how hard you want to believe that cougars are actually attractive and preferable as opposed to bench-warmers or last-options.

Most men aren't physically or sexually attracted to older women. Cite my sources? The majority of men on Earth. Leave your home and meet some men then you'll see.

Firstly, do you know how to comprehend English or do you play word games because that's how much logic you sincerely lack? When I say "fact", I mean "fact". I can't believe you aren't mature enough to recognize the difference between facts and experiences. The problem is that YOU are equating my research and statistics as personal experiences because you just cant handle that they are facts. I added one little section at the end of my experiences and labeled them such. Do you have a problem with reading because it was very obvious which small part actually made up my experience? Uppity? That's yourself. I gave you facts and you blew up at them because you want to believe that society is against older women with younger men when they are not. As I already said, people find it weird and that's not a social stigma. Society does not go against cougar relationships and the media does embrace them and show them as more positive and successful than the reality.

Wow, you live in a fantasy. There are plenty of women who do actually marry older men for a) money, b) social status, but not c) because the man is manipulative and controlling. Unlike you, I'm not sensitive to facts or inconvenient truths so sorry but your little lame plan to make me feel bad about speaking the truth didn't work. Damaging ignorance? Really? How obsessed with cougars are you to need to attack me so much? It's not my fault that most men don't want to be with older women and that doesn't make me ignorant for stating the obvious.

I'm glad you hear your clock ticking, all of the men do too and it's a turn off for them! I'm sorry that's your reality now but attacking me won't slow your clock down!

"Since you clearly whine and complain because you so need me to respond to you and cry if I don't:"
- I'd prefer it if you didn't actually. The less of your crap in the world, the better. It's ugly.

"I consider someone like you, who is condescending to strangers to be a bad person and there are many people who agree with that."
- So you also consider yourself a bad person then. Good! We now agree on something.

"Wikipedia is not my favorite source but thanks for the sarcasm! Real sign that you actually have something productive to say. I can tell why you joined feminism...."
- And you citing Wikipedia is a sign of having something productive to say...? If is isn't your favourite source, don't use it.
And I never "joined" feminism. Your ignorance is showing again.

"you tear people down for sharing new information."
- It is not new information. It is factually incorrect information.

"You guys interpreted my comments that way because you both emotionally didn't like what I said."
- I factually didn't like what you said. And I provided research to support my point. You linked us to pop-facts that didn't even support your argument.

"I tried to be as polite as I possibly could"
- Jesus christ!

"I don't know if karma is a bitch, why don't you tell me since you're the only one here?"
- I don't think it is a coincidence that you have been engaged in multiple arguments in multiple spots across multiple topics in the short time that you have been here. You are obviously putting something nasty out there.

"Statistics prove that most men are not physically or sexually attracted to older women. That's a fact not an opinion."
- Cool fabrication. Do you have the sources for this or not? I have provided mine that counter this claim. You are still just saying things and pretending they are fact. Without legitimate evidence, you are just babbling.

"Hello, for older men to have sex with their older wives. Men who have sex with younger women don't need it as much. It's seriously common sense and it's amusing that you even needed the statistics."
- Yikes. Do some research. This is a dumb comment. Also you are the one who brought up the importance of statistics. You said they supported your claims. This is not common sense at all. It is nonsense.

"You're online and if you want to proactively deny the truth then that is on you. "
- Well you are certainly turning denying the truth into a fine art. I used the internet to demonstrate both how the research you cited was flawed, and then to provide my own evidence, and a ton of it.

"The fact of the matter is, the media does show couples of older women with younger men more often than it occurs in real life on TV and I'm sorry if the TV is your bible that you don't question."
- The fact that you wouldn't question any such representations is a damning indictment of your intellectual rigor. Also, not fact unless you provide legitimate evidence. Can't believe I still have to say that.

"I'm sure many people are reading this and laughing at how hard you want to believe that cougars are actually attractive and preferable as opposed to bench-warmers or last-options."
- I think it is funny and telling that that is how you interpreted anything said here. I already know how other people are reading your garbage.

"Most men aren't physically or sexually attracted to older women. Cite my sources? The majority of men on Earth. Leave your home and meet some men then you'll see."
- You have met the majority of men on earth? I prefer some research over the bizarre ravings of a bigot.

"When I say "fact", I mean "fact"."
- Except they aren't. And I have demonstrated they aren't. Your evidence is that you say so. That is not fact. That is opinion.

"The problem is that YOU are equating my research and statistics as personal experiences because you just cant handle that they are facts."
- That is what you are doing. You provided your so-called stats. I critiqued them, and provided you some actual research. You then babbled on about personal experiences and continued making unsubstantiated claims. You have provided no facts. Nowhere in a single one of your comments can a supported fact be found. You ranting and raving and refusing to provide evidence or engage in debate because you can't. You have no response other than to rave that the majority of men on earth don't like older women. That is complete and utter nonsense and the sign of someone so far out of their depth they just desperately cling to their ignorance and hope like hell it works out for them.

"It's not my fault that most men don't want to be with older women and that doesn't make me ignorant for stating the obvious."
- What makes you ignorant is that you believe that despite all the evidence to the contrary that I have provided, as asked.

"I'm glad you hear your clock ticking, all of the men do too and it's a turn off for them!"
- Good thing I took it back to the store and got a vibrating wristwatch instead. Feels much better and has none of that misogynist stench.

I'm sure many people are reading this and laughing at how hard you want to believe that cougars are actually attractive and preferable as opposed to bench-warmers or last-options.

Nope, that's not what we're laughing at.

Nope, that's not what we're laughing at.

link

I'd like that.
I bet Carol and Daryl would like that too. :D

link