I don't know if anyone has actually addressed my point in the original post (besides me). Because of our age difference she will retire 7.5 years after me, assuming we retire at the same age. In a 50/50 split her share will have an extra 7.5 years to grow, therefore at retirement, which is what the funds are for, the split WILL NOT result in anything close to 50/50. I think an equitable distribution should take that into account.
I know I made a second post where I said that an argument against that might be that I had an extra 7.5 years prior to our marriage to fund my retirement. After thinking about that, I don't think it matters. SHE will have an extra 7.5 yrs to fund her retirement after we are divorced, so the two cancel out.
Here's an analogy. For the sake of argument let's say we were to split two identical cars but neither of us were allowed to drive them until retirement. Both were Fords. At retirement mine was still a Ford but hers had now become a Rolls Royce. Would that be fair?