Older woman/younger man . . .

The "Cougar Rule" is half your age plus seven years. Anything lower than that is outside your range of existence. ;)

But be fair: The numbers do not matter. If you have enough shared experiences and you can continue having new experiences and have deep conversations with one another (and it's not just physical) then age is a non-issue. You can have two people the same age and still get a divorce because you have "nothing in common." Divorce stats don't lie.

Really, you have to check the statistics. Do we really know how many May-December relationships last compared to normal relationships? Anyone?
 
TheDaringHatTrick said:
I know you didn't; but I'm still wondering how any of this is "wild guessing" if she's asking for input that is relevant to the context?
Click to expand...

I was just saying that this wasn't about theorizing, because this is rather qualitive research and it starts from the data.
Not from theory.

Starting from a theory would mean that you'd have read an article about it with causal relations in it confirmed by the data from fieldwork.
And that data would only be relevant if you are experienced.
Like Yield said: being such a couple.
Or being a marriage counselor, divorce lawyer, ...

TLDR:

Yield said:
Surely that's something, that only a couple who have experienced it, can answer? How is anyone else supposed to know that?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Jester said:
I was just saying that this wasn't about theorizing, because this is rather qualitive research and it starts from the data.
Not from theory.

Starting from a theory would mean that you'd have read an article about it with causal relations in it confirmed by the data from fieldwork.
Click to expand...

Uh-huh. So what's your point? There could be somebody on the forums that is able to conform to your standards of theory and post their findings on this thread. Or even provide a link to an article.

The things that Restraint listed in the post you quoted were all possibilities of either playing or gathering the information to answer her question in the OP. I just didn't see what warranted you to label anything in this thread as "wild guessing," that's all.
 
TheDaringHatTrick said:
Uh-huh. So what's your point? There could be somebody on the forums that is able to conform to your standards of theory and post their findings on this thread. Or even provide a link to an article.

The things that Restraint listed in the post you quoted were all possibilities of either playing or gathering the information to answer her question in the OP. I just didn't see what warranted you to label anything in this thread as "wild guessing," that's all.
Click to expand...

My point is that she shouldn't have attacked Yield.
 
The Jester said:
So, I just should've said that she shouldn't patronise him instead of breaking down her arguments? What difference would that make?
Click to expand...

Yes. Because as you see, she acknowledged Yield's message, and said she didn't mean anything by it.

Sometimes people make mistakes and don't realize it; especially in a text-based medium, where its difficult to gauge what they mean. There's no point in igniting a potential flame war over an issue that can be solved in two posts or less.

That's the difference.
 
Last edited:
Restraint said:
"Attacked"? Isn't that a little harsh and misleading. I didn't attack Yield. I was responding to his comment about why it should be possible for us to think about the situation although we've never experienced it. That was the point of the post.

Please don't misinterpret and misrepresent what i've said. Thx.
Click to expand...

Okay then, whatever you call this:
Restraint said:
There's something called theorizing and imagination, and forethought/foresight, other people's experiences, and reason, and potential, and possibility, and Ni. ; )
Click to expand...

I call that offensive.
 
Restraint said:
Why is this an issue? If Yield says something, i would understand, but why are you bothered by it so much?
Click to expand...

I felt that you were belittling me when you responded sarcastic, and then you did the same with Yield.

That's why.
 
I think that's between you two - PM, anyone?

:focus:

Anyway, let's go back to the topic. I sort of agree that it's tough to see if May-December relationships will go the distance. They might actually last longer than other relationships because they discussed the differences prior to having a relationship. Who knows?

If you're asking me if I personally think they can then yes, as long as the two aren't in it for just a physical relationship and they have a variety of interests.
 
Restraint said:
Fact is, many people have responded to me in a rude and sarcastic manner, including you, and i've found a way to brush it off. So, why somehow is it necessary to make my response an issue compared to anyone else's? I'm sure almost everyone here has been offended by something someone has said, however unintentional. So, i'm not getting it.

And i think Yield is more than capable of speaking for himself.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll leave it at this.
 
My brother is 28 and his wife is 33.

My best friend is 24 and his girlfriend is 28.

My first girlfriend was 21 while I was 19.

I guess it's a maturity thing, the more mature you are the more you'll lean towards someone the same way; usually they are older... obviously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top