Sure, its possible or even likely that evolution has something to do with it, but i think you need a more compelling evidence than that to be convincing.
Human children takes over a decade to become adults, so it is pretty likely evolution selected for women who stopped getting pregnant once they neared the end of their lifespan. Producing kids is super expensive so better take care of those you already have at that point.
> Why is the sterotype that youth is very attractive in woman, but the same sterotype doesn't apply to the same extent in men
Reasonable theory: Women mostly select men with good genes. Men mostly select women who can get pregnant and survive said pregnancy and bring the kid to adult. The main predictors for a woman being able to get and survive pregnancy is that she has a flat stomach (so not already pregnant) and she is young and healthy. Also existing kids will hurt your kids so better select a woman who doesn't already have kids, which historically meant young women.
Good genes is much more complicated, age is a positive factor here since it means the man could survive for that long but there are all sort of things women could look for here.
Would love to hear your proposed mechanism
You could argue that it would be better if the genes considered these scenarios better and adapted. But genes are very crude, they can't encode for all those things, so instead they just do what is best in the typical scneario.
Additionally, in pre-industrial societies, i think that children become a net positive much quicker, so im not sure the resource calculation is quite as stark.
E.g. compare societal attitudes: more blacks shot by police => definitely racism => massive protests; more men shot by police => well obviously men are biologically wired to be more violent.
I assume because women’s fertility is pretty much gone by the time they hit 40, while men are fertile till past 100 years old.