"My point is that if you are the means for her goal (and not a distraction/pastime) then you are in position to manipulate her. If her goal is a career and she depends on a boss for her career, she is vulnerable to manipulation on casting couch; if her goal is a marriage and she is committed to some boyfriend, she is vulnerable to be manipulated by him."

She is only dependent upon you if you ARE the goal, not merely one perceived means.

Is it really the case that the prospective boss who is not offering a job but a "chance" on the casting couch has an advantage over the one who won't waste her time with such distractions?

Maybe the older woman has more invested in one particular access point. But the 20something is known for mid-course corrections to ensure that her trajectory doesn't go astray. Ferinstance it is not uncommon to find out as an undergrad that a better school exists to pursue the same course of studies in graduate school. Transferring is a lot more common at that age than putting all your eggs in one basket.

It is still the case that she is not good casual relationship material for the person seeking someone easy to manipulate, as the ageist myth goes. Because the ageist myth has only the ages of the parties as its sole criterion. And it completely ignores what women are actually like at that age.

"if her goal is a marriage and she is committed to some boyfriend, she is vulnerable to be manipulated by him."

If the manipulation takes her further from that goal, then no, no she isn't.

She is in fact more resistant to manipulation from a BF because the relationship is a means to an end and not an end itself.

One should also look at today's 20somethings and career loyalty. They are more interested in the overall trajectory rather than the perception of loyalty. And who can blame them? In todays economy putting 30 years or even a decade into the same company in hopes of being rewarded for loyalty alone is not a very good prospect.

Modern employers know that todays young men and women are more likely to leave in order to jockey and leverage their way to career advancement rather than stay put and hope that they're rewarded for putting up with the conditions year in year out.

Does this sound to you like someone who is more vulnerable than the older person who may have put down roots?

Dante