Too young to bang?

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by unjung

I think the issue between a 30 year old and a 17 year old comes down to the worldliness of the 30 year old and his (or maybe her) ability to manipulate the younger partner.

21 and 17 I would not do. Once they hit 18, for some reason, I feel differently.

Social conditioning. It doesn't work that bad (18 is college, right?) so there is generally some wisdom to that attitude although I don't condone it's universal application.

 

[versusqc]

Originally Posted by MsMcGillicuddy

My friends and I employ the following "skeevy or not" formula:

n/2 + 7 = x

where n = your age

and

x = the youngest a potential whatever (hook-up, date, partner) would be

So 17 = borderline skeevy in this case, especially if you're almost 22 and she's just barely 17.

Of course if your gut says skeevy (which I'm thinking it might, since you posted the question), then take a pass.

Edit to add: Apparently it needs to be stated explicitely - if it's against the law in your state, don't even think of doing it. Oy.
I dont know what's skeevy in this? What's the relation between that math formula and the real situation? What is it based on? Anyway, got a better rule for this, and this time based on reality and not some low class morality:
If there is grass on the field, play ball.
No but really, if you love her, and that she love you too, and that she is ready for it(on an intellectual maturity point), than there is nothing "skeevy" her, just a relation between consensual human being...

 

[Piobaire]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

Well I don't necessarily place being older or having acquired the trappings of maturity as being a "win" in that sense so I'm sure we technically disagree on important points.

Not sure I said, or even intimated, it's a "win." We can quibble on semantics all day, but I think a safe statement would be that most 17 are not in the same phase of life as most 30s. I understand (somewhat) your nature, and why usual standard language for this conversation will bother you, but I don't think even you would maintain that the majority of 17 are at the same point in life or weltanshcung, as most 30s.

 

[Fuuma]

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Not sure I said, or even intimated, it's a "win." We can quibble on semantics all day, but I think a safe statement would be that most 17 are not in the same phase of life as most 30s. I understand (somewhat) your nature, and why usual standard language for this conversation will bother you, but I don't think even you would maintain that the majority of 17 are at the same point in life or weltanshcung, as most 30s.
If we get into the realm of personal representations I would say that the concept of generations and it's use to explain cosmetic social changes and continuity in contemporary society obscures more than it reveals and should often be minimized or abandoned entirely as a way of explaining Events. Touching on this might explain why I also loathe to bring it as a strong explanation when we enter the interpersonal. We're not the same age but aren't as far removed as say, a 17 y/o and I. Yet I'd, in all probabilities, would have been a worse match for a woman like your wife, issues of attraction put aside (don't know her and don't wanna get into that conversation as that's not the point and might be impolite), than for many 17 y/o.

 

[Piobaire]

Originally Posted by Fuuma

If we get into the realm of personal representations I would say that the concept of generations and it's use to explain cosmetic social changes and continuity in contemporary society obscures more than it reveals and should often be minimized or abandoned entirely as a way of explaining Events. Touching on this might explain why I also loathe to bring it as a strong explanation when we enter the interpersonal.

We're not the same age but aren't as far removed as say, a 17 y/o and I. Yet I'd, in all probabilities, would have been a worse match for a woman like your wife, issues of attraction put aside (don't know her and don't wanna get into that conversation as that's not the point and might be impolite), than for many 17 y/o.

I think we're dragging in things that don't need to be dragged in, i.e. "generations." Just dealing on the personal level.

Speaking of issues of attraction, an interesting thing. My wife and I did not meet until our late 20s. We both agree, that if we had met in our teens, neither one of us would have considered any kind of relationship, probably including even friendship. Both of us changed so drastically from 17 to late 20s, we were almost different people.

 

[83glt]

Originally Posted by Chiaroscuro

WTF were you raped as a child or something, pleez STFU immediately.

I asked here simply out of curiosity. My mind is already made. While I would love to hit it, my gut and common sense are saying no. As well age of consent is 18, and she wont be 18 till september. So I will pass.
I was just teasing bro.

 

[T4phage]

itt too many faggots

if partner =! jailbait wtf is wrong with you then?

 

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by T4phage

itt too many faggots

if partner =! jailbait wtf is wrong with you then?

+1.

 

[MsMcGillicuddy]

Originally Posted by versusqc

I dont know what's skeevy in this? What's the relation between that math formula and the real situation? What is it based on? Anyway, got a better rule for this, and this time based on reality and not some low class morality: If there is grass on the field, play ball. No but really, if you love her, and that she love you too, and that she is ready for it(on an intellectual maturity point), than there is nothing "skeevy" her, just a relation between consensual human being...
The formula is just something someone pointed out works pretty much every time. I have no idea where it came from. To me skeevy is similar to pervy, and pervy is being with someone who may not be able to form consent. Frankly, that isn't just about age differences - it's about a lot of different factors. The formula is just, in my experience, a pretty good (and somewhat entertaining) starting point. Not sure how it's "low class morality" though. But to each his own.

 

[JoeWoah]

The fact that this thread even exists = EPIC FAIL!

 

[Rambo]

Originally Posted by JoeWoah

The fact that this thread even exists = EPIC FAIL!
Who could have ever guessed how you would have responded. You're really turning over a new leaf.

 

[Chiaroscuro]

maybe i should have put this in DT so it wouldnt be taken so seriously.

pedobear and i are not friends.

 

[emosstheboss]

Is 16 too young for an 18 year old?

 

[Matt]

yeah, see this is where it gets morally dubious. 21 and 17, I am a pretty clear cut 'wait for her birthday son', when it is 18/16 - with a couple who may have been together since they were 16/14...then morally I have no issue with it - actually I kind of think that's how it should be - but I do think it almost completely depends on the people involved...

One phone call to the authorities from an enraged father will change that boy's life forever however....I mean, even if the courts see it his way, there's a lot of mess in there that he would rather have not gone through.

 

[young Ego]

Seeing as none of us know the girl we can't really give you much in terms of good guidence but, you have got to take it case by case. I don't see anything wrong with the situation but, you must account for where you live and how big a mouth she/her friends have. It's probably not something you want to be talking about, or hearing about from someone else.

I'm still laughing from that formula...and hoping I won't ever need it.