This article bothers me on all sorts of levels but the psychology certainly makes sense. I'm just hoping for a broad cultural change that doesn't make late 20s the only time women are supposed to be more than just content.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
That article is flat out appalling. Of course, what would we expect from a study sponsored by a leading hair color company. Is this the 1950s? Did I just enter a worm hole? WTF?
Google the words "happiness age" and notice the conflicting results presented. Some say you are happier when you are older, some say it depends on your attitude, etc. There seems to be no one, true answer. Isn't it closer to the truth to say that we go through ups and downs in life?
On a personal note, I have been the happiest of my life in my thirties. Contentment that I simply did not have as a younger woman has brought me peace. Furthermore, I know women who say the same thing about being in their fifties and sixties.
Question the source on studies like the one in the article. Question the source.
I couldn't find who was responsible for the study in a brief check around the web.
Still, I can definitely see how that bias would occur and it upsets me that I didn't see it before. If I was a hair care company I would want 28 to be the happiest age. Too young and you don't sell more hair care products. Too old and it makes their product sound unnecessary/flimsy. 28 could have easily been a number come up with in a room full of evil marketing statisticians.
I just didn't read the article carefully enough:
"A spokesman for home hair colour brand Clairol Perfect 10, which carried out the study of 4,000 women."
So Clairol paid for the study.
Post a Comment