this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
612 points (94.5% liked)
memes
10163 readers
2532 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But 10 years ago when we met it would have been outside that range.
Half my age plus 7 would have been 4.5 years older then her age then. How can it be acceptable now, but not then?
That's literally how the formula is intended to work, since any given age difference means less the older the two parties are (ie. a 40 year old married to a 50 year old is no big deal, but that same couple at 16 age 26 years old is creepy, and illegally so).
If your partner was 4.5 years outside of the formula range when you met (and assuming when you met is when you started dating...not some stupid gotcha like "we met at church when I was a teenager and they were a young child, and we didn't see each other romantically for another 15 years! Haha!") it's probably a situation where it was indeed eyebrow raising when you started dating.
Because we assume that life experience is an inverse square relationship with age.