5 ms·

Both are bad? So it just so happens that the current threshold for post-pubescents (18 years old) happens to align with what you believe to be the only moral va

Both are bad? So it just so happens that the current threshold for post-pubescents (18 years old) happens to align with what you believe to be the only moral value? So all those other states, countries and provinces throughout history which have adopted slightly different cutoffs (and therefor state-sanctioned pedophilia by your definition) were just morally bankrupt and evil? So 17 is wrong? So 16 is wrong? 15 is wrong? Which would you say is wrong if you were born in a time or state when 17 was the legal limit? Would you have seen through the poor legislation and advocated for raising it to you magic number of 18? Would you be advocating that anything other than 17 is wrong? It reminds me of people who are born into a random country with a random god, and insist that only that god is correct. What luck!

anonymouskimmer 3y ago
I'm not the person you're responding to. The "age rule" [1] about dating is that the younger person is at least half the age of the older person plus 7 years. This implies that it's okay for a 20 year old to date a 17 year old, but not a 21 year old (unless the 17 year old is 17 and a half). It's a kind of silly rule, but has some purpose in terms of "ickyness" (edit: and equivalent maturity) when applied to people in the first decade after puberty. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/meet-catch-and-keep/201405/who-is-too-young-or-too-old-you-date https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/meet-catch-and-keep/...
- prepend 3y ago
  This is a silly rule as a 40 year old marrying a 20 year old breaks the rule and there are many situations where this can be explained. And it’s legal everywhere. This rule isn’t a rule at all as a heuristic to use at dinner parties to be snooty about rich people and trophy wives (they are almost always rich old men with young women exchanging their youth and beauty for wealth. It’s icky, but I think everyone understands Anna Nicole Smith’s reasons).
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    I know, I said it was silly. A 40 year old coupling with a 20 year old is still icky to me due to the life experience as an adult divide. A 30 year old with a 50 year old much less so; I just think the 30 year old is setting themself up to spend a lot of time as a caretaker at some point.
    - prepend 3y ago
      I get it’s icky for you, but I think the world is trying to move into a “don’t kink shame consenting adults” phase where there’s less commenting in the vein of “sure sodomy is legal, but personally, I find it icky.” I’m not sure many people in the world are interested in what you and I find icky. If the 30 year is mentally incompetent and unaware of their future as a caretaker then the issue isn’t age, but abuse of the mentally incompetent. And, again, I don’t think this applies to your intent but it reminds me of people complaining about how hard it is to live as a gay person or interracial marriage, etc etc. Where the various difficulties are noted when discussing if it should be allowed or not. Interracial marriage is a right as long as they are consenting adults.
      - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
        There are kinks which deserved to be shamed, and these are the kinks in which grooming and ratcheted boundary violations exist. This includes relationships which weren't always seen as kinks, but have become so as society has evolved. Age is a parameter which can sometimes be shamed because of possible differentials in experience. It can't be shamed all of the time, but there are valid reasons to use it as a first-line gate, even after age-of-consent laws are no longer in the picture. Part of the pressure to move the world into a total '“don’t kink shame consenting adults” phase' is from people with abusive kinks who don't want to be checked on their abuse. Screw them. Every kink deserves nested evaluation as to whether it should be totally shamed, generally shamed (with exceptions), generally not-shamed (with exceptions), or seen as okay to do in private (but not public), or seen as okay in general.
        3y ago

anonymouskimmer 3y ago

I'm not the person you're responding to. The "age rule" [1] about dating is that the younger person is at least half the age of the older person plus 7 years. This implies that it's okay for a 20 year old to date a 17 year old, but not a 21 year old (unless the 17 year old is 17 and a half). It's a kind of silly rule, but has some purpose in terms of "ickyness" (edit: and equivalent maturity) when applied to people in the first decade after puberty. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/meet-catch-and-keep/201405/who-is-too-young-or-too-old-you-date https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/meet-catch-and-keep/...

prepend 3y ago
This is a silly rule as a 40 year old marrying a 20 year old breaks the rule and there are many situations where this can be explained. And it’s legal everywhere. This rule isn’t a rule at all as a heuristic to use at dinner parties to be snooty about rich people and trophy wives (they are almost always rich old men with young women exchanging their youth and beauty for wealth. It’s icky, but I think everyone understands Anna Nicole Smith’s reasons).
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  I know, I said it was silly. A 40 year old coupling with a 20 year old is still icky to me due to the life experience as an adult divide. A 30 year old with a 50 year old much less so; I just think the 30 year old is setting themself up to spend a lot of time as a caretaker at some point.
  - prepend 3y ago
    I get it’s icky for you, but I think the world is trying to move into a “don’t kink shame consenting adults” phase where there’s less commenting in the vein of “sure sodomy is legal, but personally, I find it icky.” I’m not sure many people in the world are interested in what you and I find icky. If the 30 year is mentally incompetent and unaware of their future as a caretaker then the issue isn’t age, but abuse of the mentally incompetent. And, again, I don’t think this applies to your intent but it reminds me of people complaining about how hard it is to live as a gay person or interracial marriage, etc etc. Where the various difficulties are noted when discussing if it should be allowed or not. Interracial marriage is a right as long as they are consenting adults.
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      There are kinks which deserved to be shamed, and these are the kinks in which grooming and ratcheted boundary violations exist. This includes relationships which weren't always seen as kinks, but have become so as society has evolved. Age is a parameter which can sometimes be shamed because of possible differentials in experience. It can't be shamed all of the time, but there are valid reasons to use it as a first-line gate, even after age-of-consent laws are no longer in the picture. Part of the pressure to move the world into a total '“don’t kink shame consenting adults” phase' is from people with abusive kinks who don't want to be checked on their abuse. Screw them. Every kink deserves nested evaluation as to whether it should be totally shamed, generally shamed (with exceptions), generally not-shamed (with exceptions), or seen as okay to do in private (but not public), or seen as okay in general.
      - 3y ago