From the infamous article, Women: The Most Responsible Teenager in the House:

I have not yet seen one single man get angry that this article blatantly suggests men are more immature than women from pretty much the age of 12 to 28. I mean, no teenage boy nor man in his twenties takes any offense whatsoever to the suggestion that they are not as mature as their female peers, yet women and their enablers are having virtual heart-attacks over the suggestion that men may have some advantage over females. And, to note, it is virtually accepted scientifically that girls do, indeed, mature faster than boys, both physically and mentally. (Which already proves the male and female brain are not the same). Physically, for example, in puberty girls mature faster than boys in such things as height. But as we all know, while boys start their growth spurt later than girls, boys grow to be significantly taller than girls. Furthermore, males also do not fully fill-out muscularly until they reach their late twenties. However, an 18 year old female is pretty much at her peak of physical development at that age, and by her late twenties is beginning to decline.

I didn't actually stop and think about this double standard until re-reading the whole TRP sidebar and seeing this note included at the bottom of this article. Good fucking point.

How come it's so taboo to suggest that women are at their peak around 18 but completely ok and accepted that men don't mature as fast as women do? I've never questioned this. Ever. It's always been obvious, and now the other side of the coin- that women don't need to mature past 18- is seen as completely misogynistic, sexist, and all of the above.

The article presented all the studies and resources to verify this claim, yet it is still the most commonly attacked piece of TRP. Why?