17 y/o girl and 29 y/o guy? should the guy know better?

Gavin83

CruisingSaver wrote: »

I would hardly call using the legal term for their respective ages emotive! :rotfl:

Let's remove the ages from what you said:

"I don't think I could get past wondering why a grown adult would seek a relationship with a child."

Get my point? It's almost like your suggesting he's a !!!!! which most definitely isn't the case. Besides which I don't consider 17 a child, they're a young adult. Someone who's old enough to work, get married, have children and drive is not a child.

Lily-Rose wrote: »

Upshot is (IMO) that 17 is waaaaaay too young to get serious in a relationship. At 17, you should be partying, doing A levels, backpacking around Europe with your mates in the holidays, applying for uni places, and pursuing various hobbies and extra curricular activities. No way should you be cavorting around with a 29 year old, and getting deeply involved; whether you're female OR male.

If this were a female 17 and a male 29, OR a male 17 and a female 29, I would be saying the same thing. Don't settle down at 17. So much more to do with your life!

Who says a 29 year old chasing a 17 year old is after a serious relationship? I'd assume he was just after sex with a younger, more technically perfect female. A bit of fun basically. Personally I don't see anything wrong with that. There isn't really any technical difference between a 29 year old guy or a guy her own age having sex with her, she's still having sex. If anything I'd expect the 29 year old to be more 'skilled' and to be more careful with protection.

I'm guessing it's because parents would see a 17 year old guy wanting to have sex with a 17 year old girl as normal where as a 29 year old would be seen as a pervert. I'm just not sure I agree with this opinion.

Marvel1

Gavin83 wrote: »

Let's remove the ages from what you said:

"I don't think I could get past wondering why a grown adult would seek a relationship with a child."

Get my point? It's almost like your suggesting he's a !!!!! which most definitely isn't the case. Besides which I don't consider 17 a child, they're a young adult. Someone who's old enough to work, get married, have children and drive is not a child.
.

But who cannot even buy a packet of cigarettes or alcohol, or even vote.

Out of curiosity do you have children?

just_trying

Big deal, here goes I was" just "18 my partner was 32, still together, though as any relationship things can change. We've been together over 18 years.

just_trying

cjdavies wrote: »

But who cannot even buy a packet of cigarettes or alcohol, or even vote.

Out of curiosity do you have children?

Because even a few years ago you could buy fags. You can smoke but not buy at 16, silly rule.

Edit, you could vote in Scotland.

just_trying

xXMessedUpXx wrote: »

Whilst legally there is nothing wrong with a 29 year old dating a 17 year old personally t gives me the creeps. Girls that age pretty much have zero life expereience and many wont even have been in a serious realtionship. I always think why can't a guy that age find a woman nearer his age? Like is there something wrong with him, why does he want to be with someone barely out of school? What on earth would you have in common? Your life experiences are so far apart. Most of the stuff you've done she won't have.My bf is 28 and if he started expressing an interest in 17 years olds i'd still find that weird and creepy. (Likewise if a i had a male friend who did that the same would apply). Morally it just doesn't sit well with me. _pale_

Why, I have learnt there is plenty people not as mature as 30 plus people. When I had my youngest I was compared to older people, and plenty said I was doing a better job, did that according to you make him a less of a creep, no. But we've had 3 kids and there all healthy and happy and my OH has never been called a creep. Guess what it happens !!. As for everything else, if your oh started expressing a interest in anyone else, time to leave.

just_trying

Lily-Rose wrote: »

Upshot is (IMO) that 17 is waaaaaay too young to get serious in a relationship. At 17, you should be partying, doing A levels, backpacking around Europe with your mates in the holidays, applying for uni places, and pursuing various hobbies and extra curricular activities. No way should you be cavorting around with a 29 year old, and getting deeply involved; whether you're female OR male.

If this were a female 17 and a male 29, OR a male 17 and a female 29, I would be saying the same thing. Don't settle down at 17. So much more to do with your life!

Suppose it depends on what you find offensive. It's not to way to young according to many people. What when you go out with someone for months and the cycle repeats, again and again because people think it's WRONG or with the wrong person. Just people's opinions, who cares about people calling someone a creep, happiness means lots more, than what others think.

unholyangel

Guest101 wrote: »

To be pedantic that's incorrect. It is legal to do anything not prohibited by the law. There is no 'breathing' act....

I made no distinction between civil, criminal or common law. That was your rather bizarre point.

Yes, that was my distinction to highlight the error of your wording - that legal does not mean anything that is not illegal, it means permitted by law rather than not mentioned by law. (or at least in this context - the other being relating to law as in "the legal profession")

Lawful - in comparison - just means that it conforms to the law rather than actually being permitted by it.

As for your own bizarre point (and its bjork bizarre) just what purpose would a breathing act have and how would it be enforced?

missbiggles1

Gavin83 wrote: »

Let's remove the ages from what you said:

"I don't think I could get past wondering why a grown adult would seek a relationship with a child."

Get my point? It's almost like your suggesting he's a !!!!! which most definitely isn't the case. Besides which I don't consider 17 a child, they're a young adult. Someone who's old enough to work, get married, have children and drive is not a child.



Who says a 29 year old chasing a 17 year old is after a serious relationship? I'd assume he was just after sex with a younger, more technically perfect female. A bit of fun basically. Personally I don't see anything wrong with that. There isn't really any technical difference between a 29 year old guy or a guy her own age having sex with her, she's still having sex. If anything I'd expect the 29 year old to be more 'skilled' and to be more careful with protection.

I'm guessing it's because parents would see a 17 year old guy wanting to have sex with a 17 year old girl as normal where as a 29 year old would be seen as a pervert. I'm just not sure I agree with this opinion.

Not a pervert - manipulative and/or unable to cope with an adult woman of his own generation.

Gavin83

cjdavies wrote: »

But who cannot even buy a packet of cigarettes or alcohol, or even vote.

Out of curiosity do you have children?

I don't smoke but I thought you could buy ciggies at 16. Has the age changed?

In terms of the definition I'd consider a 5 year old a child. There is clearly a difference between a 5 year old and a 17 year old. Young adult seems perfect in my eyes, suggests they are not quite an adult yet but not far off. Of course it wouldn't have been as emotive to write that.

In answer to your question no I don't have children. I'm not that far off the OPs age to be honest. However I don't feel this means I'm not entitled to an opinion on the subject.

Besides which it's all a matter of opinion. Some people would consider this wrong, some wouldn't. It doesn't make either person right.

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Not a pervert - manipulative and/or unable to cope with an adult woman of his own generation.

There's nothing to suggest the first part is true, they could be just as able to have a relationship with a woman their own age. I'll take your first point though.

onomatopoeia99

Gavin83 wrote: »

I don't smoke but I thought you could buy ciggies at 16. Has the age changed?

Yes, law changed a few years back.