|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Are relationships with large (however you perceive that) age differences okay? |
Yes, consenting adults can do what they like. |
|
93% |
[ 15 ] |
In some cases, but as a general rule they should be avoided. |
|
6% |
[ 1 ] |
No, they are always wrong. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
Total Votes : 16 |
|
Author |
Message |
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
^
he's got his eye on a mid 50's French Bolshevik. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Sicks Bux wrote: | You seem very interested in this topic, David. You're not thinking about trading the ol girl in for a newer model are you? |
Lol, not at all – as mentioned in the OP, my partner of over ten years (I can’t quite believe I’m writing that!) is older than me (we turn 32 and 41 respectively next month) and we live, together with our single offspring, in unwedded harmony at least 40% of the time.
If I were to find myself on the market again, I suspect I would be drawn to women of my own age or slightly older, as that’s the demographic of most people in my friendship group and the sort of people I seem to be drawn to nowadays (generally mid 30s). But I’m also not at all ashamed to admit that if I hit it off with some 21-year-old (or, for that matter, Stui’s suggestion of a 50-year-old French bolshevik, ooh la la) and it felt right, I would have no moral qualms whatsoever in pursuing that relationship. If we didn’t feel on around the same level in terms of emotional or intellectual maturity, then of course it wouldn’t work; but I think the idea of saying no based on age alone is ridiculous, and I do feel strongly that it’s wrong to pass uninformed judgement on other people’s consensual relationships from afar – I guess that’s just my "civil libertarian" streak (as K will attest ) coming through. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
I might turn
At least the toilet seat would be down _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
roar
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
|
Post subject: | |
|
stui magpie wrote: | ^
he's got his eye on a mid 50's French Bolshevik. |
Who doesn't?! _________________ kill for collingwood! |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007 Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
Post subject: | |
|
Lazza wrote: | My simplistic life strategy is to live and let live. To each their own when making legal choices. |
Doesn't sound simplistic Lazz, sounds like a well-formed intelligent strategy formed from vast experience.
I'd go further and question the law.
I don't think a 70-yo with a xx-yo is any more or less threatening for either party. Evil comes in all packages.
Men and women of any age can be taken advantage of in any relationship.
Throw a fixed-age law into the mix and you are guaranteeing trouble.
An 18yo age of consent as it is in many jurisdictions does seem ridiculous.
What matters (to me) is that the people in the relationship are happy not how an outsider might feel about it.
David - i think it says more about your friend than anything else.
If I saw anyone post that sort of stuff twice, I'd go as low and cutting as possible, knowing that that association was over.
Actually I'd be willing to wager if your friend saw a couple, of unconventional age difference, on the street, the happier they appeared would raise her level of disgust proportionately. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
CarringbushCigar wrote: | I'd go further and question the law.
I don't think a 70-yo with a xx-yo is any more or less threatening for either party. Evil comes in all packages.
Throw a fixed-age law into the mix and you are guaranteeing trouble.
An 18yo age of consent as it is in many jurisdictions does seem ridiculous. |
I mean, ultimately the problem is that, by removing a fixed-age law, you do get situations of clearly exploitative dynamics, grooming, etc. becoming permissible with no possible recourse. A 14-year-old who feels happy now may well feel taken advantage of (or worse) later, for instance, and that’s not something to sneeze at if part of that taking-advantage involves being rushed into sexual relationships they’re not ready for, missing out on formative experiences and important milestones and so on.
I’m a big believer that the law shouldn’t be a blunt instrument, and nobody with common sense wants to see a situation in which a consensual relationship between, say, two teenagers ends up with one on a register because there were two years and a month age difference between them (I should know; my own first relationship would have been considered statutory rape in at least one Australian state, and I know and my former gf know perfectly well that that’s patently absurd – our relationship was fully consensual and legal and there was no problematic power dynamic of any kind). So I think it’s quite arguable that there could be more flexibility in how it’s interpreted, and anyone can argue – hopefully with recourse to serious and extensive research in, say, child developmental psychology – that the age of consent should be x instead of y. But unless you want to see scenarios in which actual kids are getting exploited for the sexual gratification of adults acting with impunity, you’re going to need a line in the sand somewhere, and I don’t think one could responsibly support any attempt to remove that. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|