Hmm.
One commonly cited "rule" is to halve your age, and add 7, and anything below that is "not appropriate". So for me, "too young" is 22, "too old" is 46. Initially, this seemed kind of plausible. But when I thought about it, some of the implications were decidedly disturbing.....
If I dated a 22 year old
- I would have been in Year 12 while they were in Year 6 (which means I could have taken them to my Year 12 formal- and probably been arrested)
- I would have been finishing uni when they had just started high school (just imagine the scene at my graduation ceremony....)
If I dated a 46 year old
- They would have finished Year 12 when I was still learning how to walk (I guess they could have taken me to the formal in my pram....)
- I would not have even been in kindergarten when they were having their 21st (no alcohol for me at that party, then!)
Is it just me, or is this somewhat, err, worrying?
But I think this is why the half age + 7 rule is so good. It doesn't depend on how old you were, just how old you are, even if you'll eventually be within dating range. And it forbids anyone from dating anyone until they're both 14 :)
ReplyDeleteSo, you've said you've only dated younger guys - what's the maximum age difference so far?
Yes, I agree- it's about how old you are *at the moment* which matters, rather than how old you were. Whilst it seems fine (at least to me!) for a 38 year old to date a 28 year old, it definitely doesn't seem OK for a 14 year old to date a 24 year old. But I still reckon it's a bit freaky when you think about some of the examples I gave....
ReplyDeleteSo far, the biggest age difference between myself and someone I've dated has been 8 years. My most successful relationship was with someone 2.5 years younger, though.