CoverGirl keeps on getting better with age, adding new members to its roster of awesome faces. The same can be said of its newest star, 69-year-old model, dietician and entrepreneur Maye Musk.

Musk, who is also the mother of Tesla founder Elon Musk, filmmaker Tosca Musk and The Kitchen Community founder Kimbal Musk, has two master’s degrees and has been modeling since she was 15.

“Maye Musk is not only a timeless beauty, but a visionary who has always follower her own path, creating new opportunities and paving the way for so many others who might not meet the industry standard of ‘model’ but are truly beautiful in every regard,” said Unkowa Ojo, senior vice president of CoverGirl said in a press release. 

The news comes just a few weeks after the global brand named Issa Rae as a CoverGirl and just days after it tapped Ayesha Curry, too. 

“Who knew, after many years of admiring the gorgeous CoverGirl models, that I would be one at 69 years of age?” Musk wrote on Instagram. “It just shows, never give up. Thank you CoverGirl, for including me in your tribe of diversity. Beauty truly is for women of all ages, and I can’t wait to take you all along this amazing journey with me!” 

Despite Musk’s long modeling career, it’s just recently that she emerged as the star of multiple magazine covers and campaigns. In an interview with The New York Times, she said aging has been good for her.

“You develop confidence, you’re able to handle the knocks a little easier,” she said. “I model for my age. I’m not trying to hide it and say I’m 50. I’m so proud that I’m going be 70.”

This news serves as further proof that the fashion and beauty industries are adjusting their dated standards of beauty. More models over 50 walked in more shows during Fashion Week in March 2017 than ever before, for example. 

 Easy, breezy, beautiful and right on the money. Big ups, CoverGirl. 

Turning 30 is no simple life event. The milestone often prompts all sorts of introspection: evaluating career goals, feeling pressure about finding love or comparing the person you are now to the one you thought you would be at 30.

Back in 2014, photographer Stephane Domingues and writer Anne Hangouet set out on a 16-month trip to photograph and interview people around age 30 from around the world. Though their lifestyles differed, each of the pair’s thirty-something subjects had something in common, Domingues said.

“I would say that the main similarity [between 30-year-olds] is the awareness of who you really are, the accomplishment of yourself,” he told HuffPost. “I think the main reason is that you already have completed your studies, worked for several years, developed some passions and maybe even built a family. All these experiences enable you to understand who you are and what you want in life better.”

Domingues and Hangouet added another subject to their series this summer, and they plan to interview more soon, Domingues told HuffPost. They catalog all the portraits on their website, Being 30, and include each subject’s name, occupation and personal quotes. 

Here’s what 30 looks ― and feels ― like in 10 countries.

See more of Domingues and Hangouet’s work on Being 30.

h/t Business Insider

Since I teach mostly young people, college age, and have been an active cyclist with much younger friends for a while now, I have depended on a persistent self-deprecating joke about being old.

Since the end of 2016, a pelvis fracture, a winter of illnesses including the flu for the first time in decades, and then my mom’s stroke followed by my father’s death have all tempted me to shift that joke to a more serious view of life. However, I am increasingly convinced the problem with the human condition is not aging ― which is inevitable and preferred to the alternative ― but a lack of compassion and community in the U.S.

While literature and pop culture are awash in portrayals of the challenges that families bring, Kurt Vonnegut spent a great deal of his work as a writer ― in speeches, essays, and fiction ― arguing passionately for more human kindness as well as the importance of the extended family, an idealizing of tribal life that recognized the horror that is human loneliness.

Like most people, Vonnegut himself may have failed some or even often as a spouse, sibling, and father, but that doesn’t diminish the power and truth behind his essential message.

I suspect I have compassion for Vonnegut’s flaws since I share them along with his ideological commitments to kindness and community ― regardless of how inept I can be at both.

And my curmudgeon tendencies are strong, but as I grow older, and as I struggle with the necessary deteriorations of aging, I am more and more apt to recognize the futility of lamenting aging, of fearing and regretting old age (whatever that may be).

I remain frustrated with aging, and my vanity is triggered more than I like to admit. But I am more convinced than ever that the real fear is a lack of community as I continue to struggle with how to provide for my mom the sort of late life she deserves despite the consequences of her stoke (which took a significant part of her humanity) and the barriers we are encountering because, to be blunt, she has very little money to sustain her ― and the typically horrible insurance that most working-class and poor people are saddled with (if they have any at all) in the godforsaken U.S.

Many times, I have lamented that in the U.S. we simply do not care about children, and about that I am both deeply saddened and convinced. But that callousness and carelessness is a subset of a much larger and damning part of the so-called American character: we simply do not care about any vulnerable populations: children, disabled people, carers, and the elderly.

The great and caustic residue of being a rugged-individual culture is that we are willfully choosing to reject community in favor of Social Darwinism, consumerism, and the almighty dollar.

Instead of social safety nets being a foundational commitment among us, we have chosen to cast everyone to the fate of the Invisible Hand, our claims to being a Christian nation reduced to so-much hokum in practice.

The cost of growing old is in fact not the deterioration of the mind and body, but the consequences of aging being magnified by a people who refuse to provide for vulnerable populations as an unwavering commitment to human dignity.

I will continue to joke with my younger students and friends about being old; it is fun and often a way to assert my humanity into an environment that I recognize will eventually discard me because of age, although my privileges of being male, white, and well-educated will inoculate me for quite some time.

Despite my many, many flaws, my anger about the callousness of the U.S. toward vulnerable populations is not about me, and extends well beyond my sadness at how the world does not really care about my aging and disabled mother.

My anger is reflected in why Maggie Smith’s “Good Bones” has resonated so powerfully over the past several months. Smith forces us to admit “[t]he world is at least/ fifty percent terrible, and that’s a conservative/ estimate,” and she keeps us focused on the vulnerability of children.

My anger is enflamed because I do believe Smith’s closing lines: “This place could be beautiful, right? You could make this place beautiful.”

My anger grows because I doubt we will ever assure that comes to fruition.

To squander vulnerable populations ― from children to the elderly ― is to abandon our souls, to spit in the face of beauty, to declare our society morally bankrupt.

“So it goes.”

Women’s interest magazines are emotional rollercoasters rife with contradictory statements about self-love and confidence. They often tell us to love ourselves the way we are while pushing weight loss and wrinkle creams. 

That’s what makes this news so exciting: Allure just declared it will no longer use the term “anti-aging,” acknowledging that growing older is something that should be embraced and appreciated rather than resisted or talked about as if it’s a condition that drains away beauty.

“Whether we know it or not, [the term is] subtly reinforcing the message that aging is a condition we need to battle — think antianxiety meds, antivirus software, or antifungal spray,” wrote Editor-in-Chief Michelle Lee on Monday, adding, “Repeat after me: Growing older is a wonderful thing because it means that we get a chance, every day, to live a full, happy life.”

Fashion has slowly but surely done a better job at being more inclusive and accepting of race, size and age. The beauty industry has been a bit slower on its feet. Plus-size model Precious Lee previously pointed out that beauty advertisements exclude models over a certain size, for example, despite the fact that women of all sizes can wear makeup.

Like visual representation, language matters, too. Lee not only banned “anti-aging” from Allure, but called on readers to think about their own words: 

When talking about a woman over, say, 40, people tend to add qualifiers: ‘She looks great…for her age’ or ‘She’s beautiful…for an older woman.’ Catch yourself next time and consider what would happen if you just said, ‘She looks great.’ Yes, Americans put youth on a pedestal. But let’s agree that appreciating the dewy rosiness of youth doesn’t mean we become suddenly hideous as years go by.

It’s great to see Allure pioneer a movement to embrace aging, and commit to actually helping women live their best lives in any decade. Allure’s September issue stars actress Helen Mirren, who, aside from looking drop-dead gorgeous in a slew of on-point looks (including one corset belt that might just change our minds about corseted dressing), waxes poetic on the topic.

She explained to Lee that women “know we’re getting older. You just want to look and feel as great as you can on a daily basis.”

Mirren’s no-holds-barred approach shines through in the rest of her spread and interview, too. She talks plastic surgery, being too polite in her younger years and the Trump family. 

Head to Allure to read both the Mirren interview and the magazine’s statement on “anti-aging.” 

At the age of 102, Mollye Marcus would be the first family member up and out of her seat to wash dishes after the holiday dinner. When she was 104 years old, she knew exactly how much money her wallet held at any given time down to the penny. And two years later, Marcus canceled her medical alert system, insisting she had no need for such a thing.

According to her granddaughter, Debbie Tynan, she stayed incredibly sharp and quick-witted for most of her life. Marcus continued to date men even as she approached 100 — and would stretch the truth about her age.

“There are so many stories about my grandmother, like how she loved to tease and had a thing for good-looking men,” said Tynan. “When the paramedics came for her after being dehydrated, she started flirting with all these young EMS guys.”

While most of us hope to merely reach 90 years old, Marcus — who died at the remarkable age of 111 — belongs to a remarkable group of outliers called supercentenarians. While centenarians have attained a century in age, supercentenarians are those individuals who live to 110 or older.

While only three reported cases occurred before 1960 worldwide, their numbers have increased since. Today, 42 living supercentenarians (41 women and 1 man) live in countries like Japan, Italy, Jamaica, and the U.S., according to the Gerontology Research Group. One estimate states that seven in 1,000 people born at the turn of the last century lived to become centenarians, while one in 100,000 lived to be 110 or older.

Why does it happen?

Why do supercentenarians like Marcus win the longevity lottery? Scientists have begun to study individuals who reach what’s called “extreme old age” to discover what makes them unique — and possibly unlock secrets of long life in the process. Studies on supercentenarians have found that they not only live longer but also age more slowly. Age-related diseases like cancer, dementia, and stroke affect them much later in life. Other studies have found particular features in their genetic profiles.

“About 25 percent of how long a given person lives is due to genetic factors, and the rest is really luck and lifestyle,” said Stuart Kim, an aging researcher formerly at Stanford University who has spent time examining the genetic differences between supercentenarians, centenarians and regular people in hopes of better understanding what makes up the 25 percent.

Kim and his colleagues have sequenced the genomes of the oldest people in the world in order to tease out the genetic factors associated with extreme longevity. In a 2014 study, they performed whole-genome sequencing on 17 supercentenarians but failed to find a significant result due to small sample size. However, when interviewing the subjects and their family members, Kim noticed that many of them — including Marcus — remained cognitively and physically functional to a high degree well into old age.

“One way that a person could live to 100 is just luck — they didn’t have cancer, heart attack, or stroke. But if I look at that person, he’s going to look 100 years old,” said Kim. “The other potential is that a person might be aging slower, and after 100 years, this person only looks 70 years old, which is also the reason why he hasn’t had cancer, stroke, etc.”

One of Kim’s supercentenarians worked as a pediatrician until the age of 103, while another drove a car at 107 years old. Also, none of the 17 had cardiovascular disease, stroke, or diabetes at the time. These anecdotal findings are consistent with other studies that have shown a delay in onset of age-related diseases, physical and cognitive function impairment, and overall morbidity. Most supercentenarians maintained independence in daily life until 100 years old, only entering a nursing home or hospital around age 105.

In his latest study, Kim and his colleagues looked at 801 centenarians and 5,406 people over 90, finding five gene variants associated with age-related diseases that occurred less frequently in this long-living population. The findings suggest these variants may influence extreme longevity and a reduced rate of aging.

So aside from winning the genetic lottery, what can the average person do to not only live longer but also healthier? Peter Martin, a gerontology researcher at Iowa State University, has studied hundreds of centenarians over the years and learned about what contributes to successful aging.

“Other than some of the obvious characteristics, such as good physical health and high cognitive functioning, we also should consider social aspects such as good social relationships and social engagement, the personality of older adults, and the rich experiences that make up an important part of an individual,” said Martin.

The successful older adults in his studies also have aspects of their personality that promote longevity. They are resilient, outgoing, highly conscientious, and don’t worry easily. Staying active both physically and mentally can contribute to well-being later in life.

Have we hit our limit?

Tynan remembers her grandmother being an avid reader of Danielle Steele and maintaining a love for cooking and baking. She remained social for her entire life, playing cards with friends, staying in close contact with family, and involving herself in the local community.

“Family was the most important thing to her, and her world was her two daughters and grandchildren,” said Tynan. “She was sharp, loving, and very stubborn — but that also kept her going for so long.”

Overall, human life expectancy continues to rise, but one big question remains: As time goes by, will we keep getting older as a species? In other words, is there an upper limit to human lifespan? According to molecular geneticist Jan Vijg at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, we’ve already hit a plateau when it comes to maximum lifespan.

During a recent lab meeting, Vijg and his colleagues discussed the unique case of supercentenarian Jeanne Calment. In 1997, she died at the extreme age of 122 years old and today is still considered the oldest person who ever lived. The researchers wondered why, after two whole decades, no one had broken Calment’s record or even come very close. (The second oldest person had been 119 when she died.)

“We thought, maybe we’ve hit the end of the human lifespan,” said Vijg. “Even with all the advances in medicine and technology, maybe we can’t do anything to extend human life past this point.”

Using global demographic data, their study found evidence that suggests human lifespan may indeed have hit its natural limit. In countries with the largest number of supercentenarians — France, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S. — the maximum reported age at death significantly increased from the early 1970s until the 1990s. But after 1995, the maximum age began to drop and remains on a downward trend ever since. In fact, the average age at death of supercentenarians hasn’t changed since 1968. While some scientists vehemently oppose the idea of a longevity limit, most agree with the study’s conclusion.

“There has been an enormous increase in the number of people over 100 years old, so why does lifespan hit against this ceiling of 115? We don’t know,” he said.