"age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

TRJ
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 12:40 pm UTC

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby TRJ » Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:10 pm UTC

Probably we are using "date" differently. I'm not in America so maybe the social climate over here is just a bit different.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5234
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby doogly » Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:33 pm UTC

North America doesn't really have a unified culture around this. Plus 13 year olds go out of their way to have a culture which is inscrutable to the olds. Especially if they are out there gettin a sloppy beej when no one except snapchat is looking.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

TRJ
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 12:40 pm UTC

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby TRJ » Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:38 pm UTC

Well then, our definitions of "dating" are definitely different - mine is a lot more innocent.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1238
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby JudeMorrigan » Fri Dec 23, 2016 9:52 pm UTC

TRJ wrote:Fair enough. Mostly it was just to let people date at younger than 14, because I'm not too much older than that myself and can assure you that 13 yr olds dating isn't creepy. The difficulty of calculation is a valid point though.

With the 90 yr old and the 52 yr old, we're not giving a formula for who we "let" people date, we're describing the point at which a relationship crosses the line from "normal" into weird, as viewed by society in general, and I'm sure most people I know would consider that totally weird.

A couple of problems from my viewpoint: individual years mean a whole lot less after a certain point. Take our hypothetical 90 year old. By your metric, their dating a 67 year old is find but a 65 year old would just be wrong. In practice, 67vs65 means a whole lot less for most people than 13vs11 will.

Beyond that, and this is the issue with trying to make formulas like this in general - people are individuals. I've met people in their 60s who could easily pass as being twenty years younger than they actually are. I've also met people in their 60s who have been roughly treated by life. On a personal level - as someone in their late 30s, I've met people in their mid-20s I'd feel perfectly comfortable dating. (Including from a "what would society think" standpoint.) I've met others who I would completely feel like Creepy McCreeperson were I to date.

Once you get past the point where predation is a concern (or aren't yet at a point where predation is a concern in the other direction), it doesn't really make sense to do much more than just let people find their own ways.

TRJ
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 12:40 pm UTC

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby TRJ » Fri Dec 23, 2016 10:10 pm UTC

I'm sorry if I was insensitive about it, and I know the model is in no way applicable to the real world - real life is not that black-and-white, for a start. I was just kind of excited because of the maths.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5234
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby doogly » Fri Dec 23, 2016 11:53 pm UTC

TRJ wrote:Well then, our definitions of "dating" are definitely different - mine is a lot more innocent.

Maybe you share sloppy oral sex, maybe you just have a little low key spinebash or couple's loafabout. The important thing is that y ≳ x/2 + 7.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
suffer-cait
Yes, that's my perfectly normal house cat, why do you ask?
Posts: 2549
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:01 am UTC
Location: da aina
Contact:

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby suffer-cait » Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:26 pm UTC

When I was 13 I was creeper out by 13yos dating. That never went away.
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2533
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby Soupspoon » Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:44 pm UTC

suffer-cait wrote:When I was 13 I was creeper out by 13yos dating. That never went away.

As supported by the traditional formula. 13yos are supposed to date no younger than (13/2)+7yos, who are therefore at least 13.5yso. But 13.5yos, so elegible, are supposed to date no-one younger than 13.75yso. And onwards towards an asymptote... So it's gonna be at least half creepy until they're both past 14, at a bare minimum.

User avatar
suffer-cait
Yes, that's my perfectly normal house cat, why do you ask?
Posts: 2549
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:01 am UTC
Location: da aina
Contact:

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby suffer-cait » Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:53 pm UTC

Exactly
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Yablo
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:57 am UTC
Location: Juneau, Alaska

Re: "age / 2 + 7" formula is flawed

Postby Yablo » Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:34 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:And I think that if a 90 year old can land a 52 year old, fuckin' let'em.

By the time I'm 90, I'd totally try to land a 52 year old. And I've got a little more than 51 years to figure out how to convince my wife to let me keep her.

Also, my wife is almost 10 years younger than I am; I was 33 to her 23 when we started dating, and I was 36 to her 26 when we got married. By the x/2 + 7 formula, I was creepy for about a year!
If you like Call of Cthulhu and modern government conspiracy, check out my Delta Green thread.
Please feel free to ask questions or leave comments.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests