Is it worth living lighter to live longer?

I read an unconvincing book called "Princessa" by Harriet Rubin. Unconvincing in the sense that I'm somewhat persuaded but not thoroughly convinced by her argument that women should not attempt to play "a man's game" because we'll inevitably lose. Instead, she advises, harness the power of our feminine strengths (and wiles) and remain steely eyed. In my view, it is nearby impossible to come up with a winning strategy in what remains a male paradigm, but any advice should help. The career advice isn't what stayed with me.

I was more gobsmacked by the comment that women live longer because they live less intensely. What a damning fate! The truth in that statement is patently unjust and irritates me like a sliver. It's no secret that up until the last 20 years women's use of the healthcare system has been more frequent and for less serious health issues than men. Men save up their usage for middle-aged whoppers like heart attack, stroke or cancer. Men continue to live shorter lives, falling fast and hard when they retire.

L'age moyen delivers a thundering crash to the physical durability men have always assumed. After 40 the aches and pains turn to chronic shoulder and knee problems. They get vicious colds or worse pneumonia. They drink cranberry juice (urinary tract problems?) and stick to one cup of coffee per day. They are gradually becoming careful, conscious of their mortality and how the stats stack up against them. We can joke that once they're over 40 we should turn them in for a younger model but we'd probably still outlive this version. Here again men have the advantage with the trophy wife scenario. Having skipped the painful rise to affluence those broads will live even longer!

With women working full on in the last 20 years, on top of maintaining most of the household management duties, there has been a corresponding rise in heart disease and other serious illnesses among women. Still, we continue to live longer and, among my mother's generation anyway, spend a good chunk of time caring for ailing husbands alone and often unsupported, mirroring their younger lives at home with children.

I had a conversation with two men, one with youngish children. They were in agreement that bike helmets negatively affected the pleasure found in cycling and so neither were in favour of this safety practice. The women, on the other hand, thought less of their own pleasure and more of the responsibility they had towards their children, ageing parents etc. Their role as caretakers superceded the pleasure principle. Is gender or personality at work here?

The question for women in l'age moyen is, should we live harder and more fully now at the risk of dying younger? In short, take off the safety equipment in all its forms. Does it speak volumes that I use the word 'risk' in this context at all?

Is it inevitable that we will book-end our lives with caretaking instead of living for ourselves?