Defending the age-gap and faults

I wasn't sure whether or not this belonged in Chit-Chat, but since it's more relationship oriented, I decided to stick it here.

I recently talked to one of my roomates who is very judgemental about age-gap relationships. She's made various comments about people who are in them, saying they are "scandalous" or expressing her disapproval.

Now, I'm casually seeing someone who I have a very great age-gap with, but I don't see the problem. Which leads me to my point of discussion---defending the age gap relationship. Very few people know of mine, for various reasons, but my roomate would flip her lid if she knew about my little escapade ;)

I don't see age as a fault, and I think that's very difficult to defend in this society.

I wouldn't date someone who is my age but unemployed/without direction, but if I did, that would be more socially acceptable and draw less scorn from those around me.

Also, if somone were the perfect guy on the outside, but shooting heroin behind closed doors, yeah, I'd have a problem with that--intraveinous drug use would be a fault for me, just as having no direction in life, or having some philopsophy on life that was really negative or degrading to women. (Or some other red flag that immediately turned me off.)

It's just so troubling that it's ok to date people for money, or to get ahead, or because you are attracted to their power, but you can't see someone just because you like them. In fact, it seems as though age-gap couples who are religiously affiliated through the same church get a free pass because they fall under some random "God" category. (no offense)

I've just been thinking a lot about if people were to find out about my casual relationship, and how would I defend it. And while I don't see my relationship going on forever, I consider it friendly and casual, I don't regret it, I'm not ashamed of it and I definately won't rule out older men in the future.

Age isn't a fault, personal decisions and lifestyles can be, for me.

Just had to get that off my chest...I've been thinking about it for a few days and figured, "who better to share this with?" It's disapointing that I have a few close friends and an Internet message board to share this with. I wish society in general were a little more understanding.

What is there to defend? If someone wanted to know what interested me about a particular person, I'd tell them. But I wouldn't defend something that I didn't feel required any defense. If someone wanted to give me their unsolicited opinion about it I'd consider it to be worth exactly as much as it cost - nothing. Let your roommate flip. It's her lid to flip after all. The only power she has over you is the power you give her. And people who try to enforce their opinions on others get the most power by making people justify themselves. You've got nothing to explain.

I think it is great that you are doing something that those around you disagree with, yet you are standing your ground, doing it anyway, and not letting others influence your decision or cause you to stop doing what they disapprove of. Good for you Adelade. You have character, you think for yourself, you stick to your convictions. This is a good lesson in life. And you are passing it with flying colors!

People will not always approve of everything you do. Its just a fact of life. People can be very judgemental. As you get older, it gets easier to ignore the opinions of others.

I'm very very proud of you sweetheart. You are a beautiful person. A special person. I would be proud to be your friend. And I am. Big, big, cyber hug.

the old guy

One of my best friends, when we were 25 was dating a 50 year old guy. She was very straightforward about it. No secrets, no apologies... and quite frankly that took the wind out of everyone's sails. There was nothing to gossip about, and this guy is quite awesome.

Flash forward to 11 years later. They are still together, happily so, and they just went to his grandmother's funeral together. I think she was 98. In my mind that means they are going to have a long full life together, despite the fact that he is 59 or 60 now.

Secrecy makes it seem shameful. Be who you are and tell your friends when you are comfortable and it is safe for you :D

For societal judgments, I say hang them all. Who cares what anyone else thinks? It's not their lives you are living, it's yours. And that's the only person you should worry about.

However, if the roommate situation could be one where you would find yourself without a place to live because of her convictions, then maybe some discretion early on is prudent. I'm never one to take the easy road, but sometimes you have to choose when and where you are going to have your battles.

You tell who you want to tell, and withhold it from those you think will cause some detriment to you in the mean time. There's nothing that says you have to run around with a banner over your head screaming the age difference. Mostly, I find people are more likely to focus on the age difference if I or my YM are focusing on it. If we're not, it's easier to have people see us as any "regular" couple and not an AGR couple.

:confused: Whats to defend ? It's YOUR life, who care what other people think:p

:confused: Whats to defend ? It's YOUR life, who care what other people think:p

YOU PUT THIS SO RIGHT - Wish I could get my YW to realize this........and stand up for herself.......

I totally agree.

If you are straight forward about your dating preferences and current situation, know what you want and why, have the confidence to stand by your decision and say, "Yes, so?" to anybody who questions your choice, it's going to be a non-issue.

Lots of people ask me about loyalty in a 4000km distance intercontinental relationship and I just have to stand by my choice and tell them yes, I trust him, and he has to trust me too, for this to work. We accept and understand this and if other people don't, that doesn't really matter to us.

I recently talked to one of my roomates who is very judgemental about age-gap relationships. She's made various comments about people who are in them, saying they are "scandalous"

Does she give any reason? Or just make disapproving noises without explaining what her grounds are? Presumably she is objecting to AGR's on principle - argueing that there is some ground for public disaproval - rather than suggesting that she thinks they might be unwise for the individuals concerned.

Beyond unreflective conformity and an old-fashioned idea that everyone ought to have children, what more can she come up with?

How easy would it be for you to change roommates? One who you know is more accepting of people? If it's next to impossible to change roommates then Miyoshi is correct in choosing when to fight this battle and that discretion may be the better part of valor at the moment.

If you can change roomies then feel free to do so. And if your ex-roomie wants to know why you're moving, you can either tell them it's because they're bigoted, prejudiced, judgmental and narrow-minded or you can say "it's private and I don't wish to discuss it". Or you can hand them over to me and I'll kick their ...... for you. :bgrin2:

Either way, it's your life and only your life to live. You do what feels right to you. :yes:

I often wonder why our society has such a problem with AGRs, and what could explain the intolerance that so many people have of it. As you said, many are more likely to accept your relationship with a drug addict or directionless person than a much older man. Even gays get more of a pass today than people in large AGRs. So why is this true?

Some may blame the women's movement, claiming that "women's groups" over the years created education/awareness campaigns slanted against AGRs, motivated by resentment against perceived "female slavery" or "involuntary female servitude" that they claim existed before. These then infiltrated our pop culture and became part of our social fabric. At one time it was not uncommon for women to be pressured into marriages they didn't want, sometimes to men significantly older, which could explain the backlash. However, this doesn't explain the intolerance of older woman/young man relationships that prevailed at one time.

Others may blame psychology, claiming that our shift from religious values to intellectual reasoning and rational is the explanation. Psychologist view people clinically and define everything as "normal" and "abnormal", as opposed to the "right vs. wrong" worldview of religious faiths. There is nothing Biblically wrong with any age difference, which could explain why people in the 19th century and earlier didn't frown at it so much. Today people put much more faith in doctors and the mental health profession, and since most people are not in AGRs, it could be viewed as abnormal and pathological and therefore "wrong" in the psychiatric sense (.. you're in love with him? You need your head checked!...). However, a psychologist on this board, who's in a large AGR himself, disputes this claim, saying that there is no book or document in his profession that defines AGRs as pathological, and that "pop psychology" is the reason for the perceived disapproval.

Or perhaps it could just be that we're spoiled and hung up on "image" and material things. Large AGRs "don't look good" and so we don't like them. It could also be that people in AGR's are believed to be in the relationship for money, power, or [the older partner] looks. Since we are so materialistic anyway, people just assume the materialistic slant. I've noticed over the years that the people most intolerant of age gaps are very immature themselves. In their immaturity, they scorn at the perceived immaturity of others "chasing younger people". It's the "pot calling the kettle black" syndrome.

There are also theories about where we will go from here, and what the future may bring. My personal pet theory is that a generation will come along and question the hypocrisy of a society that accepts living together, pregnancy out of wedlock, abortion, single parenthood, divorce and remarriage and homosexuality, but still frowns at age difference. People in that generation who are attracted to other-aged people will start a "little revolution" and gain inroads into society's acceptance of their desired lifestyle, much as the gays did in the 1970's. Of course, that's just a theory. What do I know?

Great insight everyone!

I'm not trying to get out of my roomate situation, actually I think she may be moving soon anyway. We get along fine otherwise, I just notice that she is VERY critical of AGR's in general, it's very bizarre since I haven't told her or my other roomate about mine. It's not important that they or anyone else outside my close circle of friends know anyway.

Basically I just wanted to throw out the idea of defending a relationship...but I guess what it comes down to is, does anyone have to defend their relationships anyway? I guess not. I guess sometimes I just question why I'm in one and then I keep coming back to "well, I like the guy for who he is!" Then I start wondering if other people would accept that.

Anywhoo, no crises in my life, just wanted to see what people were thinking. Wishing the best to everyone! ::bgrin2:

I've never had to defend mine because my wife and I don't look like we're that far apart in age, so people in public don't guess us to be an AG couple. Even casual friends don't know and don't ask.

My closest friends and family always knew my preference, so it was no surprise to them when I married one. In fact, if anything, they were surprised the age gap wasn't bigger than it was.

Still, I often ponder why people feel the way they do about age differences. It was something I struggled with for a long time before I was married, because I liked younger women and always knew I'd want to be with someone younger.

At the same time, you have to learn to accept her opinion as exactly that, her opinion. She neither has to accept or not accept something that she considers "wierd" just because you're in the relationship. Because it ends up looking as though you're just as intolerant of her choices as you want her to be of yours.

People are who they are, you can't please everyone, but yes, you do want people to be respectful, but the truth is, they are not when they have strong opinions about a particular subject. We all have them. The fact that we're single minded about agr doesn't make it a right decision or a wrong one, it just is what it is. As you said, as long as the people in your inner circle accept and respect your relationship, all your roommate has is just a strong opinion of something that's just not right for her.

And that's ok too.

Paris

Same here with my OW/YM situation. I've always been attracted to YM. It's not a character flaw, and I'm tired of feeling like it is. And why is it that it's always me, the older one, to take the blame for the situation when in 100% of the relationships the men in my life pursued me, not the other way around?

"Societal norms" is a misnomer. There are no real norms anymore. Life is not so black and white. There are many beautiful shades in between.

That is so true. When we become intolerant of other people's intolerance, we become intolerant ourselves. It's a paradox. I used to go round and round on this topic with people.

In the final analysis, the key word is RESPECT. People need to respect your choice, even if they don't agree with it. It's not like you're breaking the law or anything.

AGR's tend to filter out the superficial people in your life and show you who your real friends are. In that sense it could even be a good thing.

Exactly. The hard part is when you have to filter out family members. That's the hardest part of all. It's like my YM said to me: "Break your heart or break my mother's heart. Just have to figure out which one I can live with."

Same here with my OW/YM situation. I've always been attracted to YM. It's not a character flaw, and I'm tired of feeling like it is. And why is it that it's always me, the older one, to take the blame for the situation when in 100% of the relationships the men in my life pursued me, not the other way around?

"Societal norms" is a misnomer. There are no real norms anymore. Life is not so black and white. There are many beautiful shades in between.


Excellent! Very well put!

There are no "societal norms" anymore, and there are many shades of gray in between the black and white. As diverse as our society has become in modern times, it amazes me that people still hold to such antiquated views of intolerance of relationships over something as superficial as age.

It always warms my heart when I hear about people who finally do come around and accept someone's choice for their own happiness, I just wish it would happen sonner.

I think it will take time, but like everything else eventually AGRs will no longer be closet relationships any more so than same sex relationships or interracial relationships. Provided the AGR doesn't violate any established laws of the the couple involved, then I figure it should be ok. When people tell me what I'm doing is "wrong", I'm just trying to figure out how in the world what I'm doing is somehow negatively affecting their lives.

The funny thing about age is when is it ok to be an adult and make adult decisions? In the US, at 18 years of age you can be asked to give up your life for your country, and you're allowed to vote in the chucklehead that will send you to do it. You're also allowed to buy porn and give yourself cancer by smoking. However, you can't drink alcohol. :confused: Also, in most states in the US, 16 is the legal age by which you can consent to sexual relations, but in most states that is only so long as the partner you're having sex with is no more than 4 years older than you. Again: :confused: So why is someone who is 20 years old ok to have sex with a 16 year old, but once s/he turns 21 in the next two weeks, then it's a crime? Technically, the age difference is still the same.

*looks up* Oh dear. Looks like I got on a rant there. Sorry. *steps down off soapbox*

I think the fact that we have so many "ages of consent" is why people are treated like children into their adult years. This is part of the problem with age-gap approval. There is no clear cut "age of adulthood" anymore. You can drive at 16 but can't vote until 18. You can vote, marry, and, as you say "give yourself cancer" at 18, but can't drink alcohol until 21. So when do people really "grow up". At 21? Then there is the informal opinion that people don't really become "grown up" until they're 25, but if you're over 35 (40? 45?) you're supposed to treat "30" as the "real" adult age. People over 50 are frowned at if they date under 35 (just ask Fred Thompson). When does it end??

I think your question is a very good one... "why is someone who is 21 old enough to die for their country and vote for the knucklehead who put him out on the battlefield, and old enough to drink, smoke, get married and even run a business, but not old enough to choose for him/herself how old a partner they wish to be with?" It's just insane.

Think of it another way. Someone who's 21 is old enough to give up their best years serving their country. Then when they get home they have to save money, put themselves through college, develop some "real" skills and get a profession. When all that is said and done, they're considered "too old" for someone the same age they were when they gave up their best years for their country? How fair is that? (... Thank you for defending my freedom! Now stay away from my daughter, you're too old for her. She's for one of the young men whose freedom you also fought for. Oh, and thank you for defending my freedom to tell you to get lost and stay away from my daughter!...)

I think you're right, that in time people will come around and accept age gaps as another acceptable alternative lifestyle, but it will probably take time. Right now there's alot of imbalance as to what's accepted and what is not.

*smiles*

I don't know why, but I was suddenly reminded of a blog post I made once:



I was riding the train home from work the other night and there was this young boy, probably about 6 or 7 years old, sitting with his mother. He had a small toy airplane, which he was "flying" about, making all those cute little "whoosh" sounds that kids do. I watched him for about 20 minutes until he and his mother got off at their stop. It was so cute to watch, and I noticed other people enjoying that bit of childhood innocence. And then I began to wonder: At what age do we cross the threshold where that kind of behavior goes from being cute and innocent and smile-provoking to people assuming you're completely nutters and need medication and a lesson on how to behave in public?

Childhood and all its glories pass us way too quickly. We spend so much time when we are younger trying to grow up, then when we get older we try to recapture that lost sense of play. My theory is this is why mid-life crises happen. I don't ever want to lose that feeling of play. It's what keeps you young and vibrant and interesting.

And before you tag me as immature, I can be serious too. Very serious. But I don't want to be stern and rigid the rest of my life. I'm convinced it produces wrinkles. And we just can't have that.

Thanks for your story. It reminds me of the time I spend with my own 3-year old son. He does all those cute things you mentioned... play dinosaurs, pretend to be a robot, play with cars and airplanes, and play Spiderman. We should all appreciate those things and never lose sight of them.

Albert Einstein once said the secret to his success was being able to "maintain the mental simplicity of a child".

I often wonder why our society has such a problem with AGRs, and what could explain the intolerance that so many people have of it. Even gays get more of a pass today than people in large AGRs. So why is this true?

Is it? In 20+ years in AGR's I've never really come upon any principled disapproval. I have sometimes come upon people saying what amounts to 'It wouldn't suit me, but I'm not worried about you doing it' or raising what are basically practical concerns (e.g. key life events happening to each partner at different times) or selfish ones (e.g. keen would-be grandparents worried there may be no grandchildren) but never opposition to the principle of AGR's.
Realistically, what grounds could they raise for an objection in principle?

The only origin for such a view I can imagine is a perception that age groups are a vital source of personal and/or cultural identity (in effect, the age group as a tribe) leading to forming a relationship outside ones own age group being seen as equivalent to forming an alliance with a foreign tribe.


Perhaps US culture has a much stronger taboo against AGR's than exists here in the UK, although the usuall perception here is that OW/YM AGR's are an American trend which has moved over here.

SW

Interesting insight.

I think also, we have to be careful not to go overboard in our assessments, which I tend to do. We have to separate fact from fiction. There are a lot of jabs at age gaps in the tabloid press, on TV, radio, and even in some news stories. Therefore, it's easy to perceive that society is "against AGRs", when in fact we may be reacting to media dramatization. In fact, every individual is different and there are vast differences in the stories of people who have encountered age gaps personally. Some people go through the roof at a 12 year gap, others marry across 30 year gaps with far less disapproval. It all depends on the person.

I like your analogy of age gaps being like tribes. That's an angle I hadn't thought of, and there is truth in it.

(... Thank you for defending my freedom! Now stay away from my daughter, you're too old for her. She's for one of the young men .)

Is this attitude (parents seeking to interfere in their adult ofspring's choice of partner) a common one in the US? I remember being puzzeled some years ago by an American film. I saw it in the late 1980's (can't recall the title) and it seemed to be contemporary. It showed a young couple meeting the young woman's parents for a formal dinner during which the young man asked her father for his permission to marry her. Since this would be seen as really bizzare here in the UK, as something that used to go on back in Jane Austin's period and even then was a convention often breached, I assumed at the time that it was unrealistic and put in for dramatic effect. Was it, in fact, realistic fiction? Do people really do that in the US? If so, if age and generation are that bound up with power and authority, I suppose that might go some way towards explaining the hostility to AGR's that you were describing.

SW

Is this attitude (parents seeking to interfere in their adult ofspring's choice of partner) a common one in the US? I remember being puzzeled some years ago by an American film. I saw it in the late 1980's (can't recall the title) and it seemed to be contemporary. It showed a young couple meeting the young woman's parents for a formal dinner during which the young man asked her father for his permission to marry her. Since this would be seen as really bizzare here in the UK, as something that used to go on back in Jane Austin's period and even then was a convention often breached, I assumed at the time that it was unrealistic and put in for dramatic effect. Was it, in fact, realistic fiction? Do people really do that in the US? If so, if age and generation are that bound up with power and authority, I suppose that might go some way towards explaining the hostility to AGR's that you were describing.

SW

It's considered "romantic" if a man still asks a woman's father for her hand in marriage. But there are very traditional people here as well.

In my case, my YM's mother is VERY against it. She cites morality flaws on my part for "even considering hooking up with someone so young". Yet she can never identify EXACTLY what is actually morally wrong. When he presses her for a definitive reason, her standard answer is "It's just wrong."

For as much as the US likes to think itself on the forefront of all contemporary issues and such, the truth of the matter is that there are a vast majority of people that still retain the puritanical way of thought. Add a healthy dose of religion to the mix, and you have a pretty tough crowd to try and sway opinion.

It does go on here, but I think it may be less common now than it was in the 1980's (which is already 20+ years ago! Ahhh!!:eek:)

I've had the perception lately that the U.K. is ahead of the U.S. in progressive thinking. However, it is just a perception, having no experience with anyone from there or ever having been there myself. I just say this from commentary I've read on the Internet. The U.S. tends to be a stick in the mud in certain areas where the U.K. is not, and I think parental approval of adult offspring's love choices may be one of those areas.

Here's another example of what I'm talking about. The U.S. recently passed a law requiring Americans who answer personals ads placed by foreigners to undergo a criminal background check and have a report with their criminal, marital and family history sent to the foreigner for signed consent before being allowed to make contact. There is a lot of fuss in this country about "mail order bride 'abuse'", and there are people here who claim that "marrying foreigners through international personals columns (called marriage brokers)" is a form of "sex trafficking". I believe there is a level of chivalry in this country that probably doesn't exist in yours. But then again, that's just my perception.

*ponders this* While I understand the reasoning they have behind this law, I do not support it at all. To even communicate with someone you have to provide full background information that most employers don't even have access to?? I think it's a violation of the right to privacy. I understand the circumstances surrounding the need for this bill, but I have just as much potential to be in a controlling, abusive, and harmful relationship with someone here in the US as I would anywhere else. If I meet someone online through, say, Match.com, why isn't the same information required? What about a woman who contacts a foreign man? The law doesn't include women. It's rather gender-specific. What if they meet through MySpace or some other social arena? Can he not bring her over until the same paperwork is provided? If so, who regulates whether or not the paperwork is legitimate?

Too many issues on a simple little "Act" that was tacked onto larger legislation.

Actually, the law is gender neutral. It includes men and women. The law states that any agency, partnership or corporation that "has foreign introductions as more than 50% of their business" falls under the marriage broker label and is subject to the law. Match.com, Yahoo Personals and most U.S. based personals columns are exempt. Which begs the question, how is the government going to prove that someone met through a "marriage broker", or through Match.com or any of the plethora of online forums such as Myspace, etc. (or even through AgelessLove!)?

Ooops! Misread on my part. Sorry.

But yeah, you're basically saying what I was attempting to say.

*goes to fetch another cup of coffee*

Sounds very hard to enforce. Does this law apply only to contacts through businesses like dating agencies, or to contacts through personal advertisements with no agency involved (e.g. if someone in the US took out an ad. in the personal column of a UK newspaper, or the other way round)?

Exactly! There is a fine line between what is considered a "marriage broker" and what is not. What if, for example, a girl from the U.K. took out a personals ad in the Washington Post or New York Times personals column? Anyone answering that ad would be exempt, because those newspapers are not classified as "marriage brokers". However, if she placed her ad in ***** (any of the "penpal" columns that specialize in foreign introductions), he would be subject to the law.

Later, when it comes time to apply for a marriage or spouse visa, if the protocol for this law was not followed, the visa is denied. What a mess!

Kinda nutty, ain't it?

What's even more bizarre about this law is that it provides no protection for American women. The address and contact information of the "girl next door" is far more dangerous in the hands of a local stalker who knows the territory, is familiar with the roads, businesses, layout of the land and hiding places, than the address of a foreigner where the stalker would have to venture outside of his comfort zone into a totally unfamiliar land where he is out of his element and she has her whole support system there to protect her.

But then, will this law open the door for legislation that allows government to require background checks and consent for ALL those who meet through personals ads? At what point does government go too far in medaling in the personal social lives of individuals?

Exactly my point. I understand the "idea" behind the legislation, but there are more documented cases of abuse domestically than there are with mail order brides specifically. Why aren't these same laws and rights made known to all women? After working with an abused women's advocacy group which offered legal advice and shelter information, you'd be surprised how many born and bred American women, regardless of education, income, or job, didn't know their basic rights when involved in a relationship, especially a marriage.

And, it's just an underhanded way for the government to keep tabs on its citizens.

Wesley, that's an interesting thing I just realized. From what I can tell, on OM/YW relationships, it seems like the younger set are faulting the OM. In the case of OW/YM, in my experience, it's the older set that criticize the OW. Either way, the "older" in the relationship takes the brunt of the derision, it seems.

I totally agree with you on that point. It frustrates my YM that his mother feels that he's perfectly capable of living on his own, but suddenly now he's immature and "doesn't know any better". So, I guess the psycho girl that he used to date that would call at all hours of the night because he didn't return one phone call is preferable to me? *shrugs*

good point wesley about church communities and AG relationships, i guess i never thought about it that way. though, for those in churches it does make it easier if they are close with other members and their families attend; a bond is there that sounds like it blinds the people around the AG couple to general society attitudes about AG couples.

very interesting....:yes:

About the whole "free pass" with church groups thing...

In addition to the other points about morality (no premarital sex) and Christian tolerance (depends on the church or congregation), in my opinion the biggest difference is when both members of the AGR are known in the church. Again, the same with any other group--if both people are known in the same social club, workplace, or group of friends then there is much less chance of a problem. When the other people personally know both members of the AGR relationship there is much less chance of sterotypes or assumptions about the couple or their relationship based on age (he's after her for her looks or for sex/she is after a "daddy figure" or financial stability).

In my case, my OM and I have not had a single problem from anyone who knew BOTH of us individual before we started dating--or from anyone who met us together as a couple.

But in my church, only 2 people have been happy for me. I know once we are married it might be different because marraige is viewed as a lifetime committment, so once we are married there (hopefully) will be a little more supportive attitude going around. People who had not yet met or gotten to know my OM would be all excited at first until they found out the age--then it was either flat out negativity or a barage of questions along the lines of "don't you want children?" or just complete focus on his age "really? he, really is 54!" "you know don't you that when you are 40 he will be 70?", etc.

Yes, there is reaction to the idea itself of an age gap relationship. But people who know both of us can see why we are together.

O, I just wanted to add that I don't defend my relationship. If someone asks, I tell them why I love my OM. If they are just giving their opinion, I listen and respectfully (but briefly) disagree. But I do not argue about or defend the relationship because I feel that I have nothing to be ashamed of or that requires a justification. If I let someone put me on the defensive, that is giving them the upper hand and it gets used against me (as in: See, you are being defensive--that proves I am right and you already know this relationship is wrong).

I have a friend in Florida who's wife was 25 and he was 59 when we met them. They were both very active in their church (he didn't say what denomination). I assume they got the church members' approval since they both continued to be active. They had been married four years, however, so it's possible they won that approval gradually over time. Often times initial disapproval / shock over age gaps is a knee-jerk reaction and people come around later.

Usually there are multiple factors involved in age-gap disapproval. "He/she's much older and (married, has kids, is an alcoholic / on drugs / unemployed, has done nothing with their life and that's why they're seeking someone younger, etc.., etc...). Seldom does someone just disapprove of age-gap period, with no other reason for disapproval.

I'm sorry to hear about your bad first experience with AG love. I've often theorized that people who do disapprove of age gaps are basing it on a bad personal experience in their past. Why else would people feel so strongly about a relationship that doesn't really involve them?

It does seem awfully hypocritical of that girl's mother to not let her see you because you're "too old" at 21, but then let her marry a 51-year old. She probably used the excuse that she was "of age" (at 19) when she dated the millionaire, but underage (17) when she dated you.

Wesley,

Great points about going to a new church or his church. The only thing is he doesn't go to church, although he will go with me to my church a few times a year.

Really though, there is marked excitement (the ooh, Amy's engaged, etc. etc.) and genuine interest asking about his name, where we met, how he proposed, how long we've known each other, where he works. But as soon as they find out he is "older" or his actual age it is like the person fell in a frozen lake. I don't even have to say that he doesn't regularly go to church, the age thing does it. And for the few people who have been more persistent and have gone further, that is the last nail in the coffin of their opinion.

So we shall see once we are married which of these people are simply judgmental or both judgemental AND hypocritical as well.

I think a lot of the negative reaction I've gotten (either in or out of the church) is due to sterotypes about age. Especially since people who initially reacted negatively lightened up after they met him. Several of them now have told me that he "actually is a nice guy". Gee, imagine that!!!! Of course I wouldn't be getting engaged to a creep--that just goes to show how people have in their head an idea of what they expect a person to be like and then are surprised to find out differently.

There was an episode of "Married with Children" where Kelley was dating a man who was in his 50s, and her parents were initially outraged, and Al wanted to beat the guy up. Howwever, when they learned the guy was a multi-millionare, then Al and Peggy were fine with it, happy about it, and hoping they'd get married. The Bundy's are a stupid sitcom, but sometimes their stupid plots are sickeningly true to life. That episode immediately reminded me of the real life episode I'd witnessed.

That shows how shallow people are. They're interested in "right" and "wrong" when it benefits them!

I was unaware of this episode, but it doesn't surprise me at all.

Back in the 80s I was leary of shows like this because I just had the feeling that there'd be an episode that bashed age-gaps. I took one look at "Married with Children" and knew it would be one of those shows. Turns out I was right.

Just a bit of trivia, though.... there was a time when Christina Applegate (who played Kelly) dated the actor who played Al.

What is there to defend? If someone wanted to know what interested me about a particular person, I'd tell them. But I wouldn't defend something that I didn't feel required any defense. If someone wanted to give me their unsolicited opinion about it I'd consider it to be worth exactly as much as it cost - nothing. Let your roommate flip. It's her lid to flip after all. The only power she has over you is the power you give her. And people who try to enforce their opinions on others get the most power by making people justify themselves. You've got nothing to explain.

Cheers to that! Well said, very well said.

I was unaware of this episode, but it doesn't surprise me at all.

Back in the 80s I was leary of shows like this because I just had the feeling that there'd be an episode that bashed age-gaps. I took one look at "Married with Children" and knew it would be one of those shows. Turns out I was right.
Well, I'd take it in the spirit of the show itself, which was a satire about the American middle class and TV shows that portrayed the middle class in an overly-positive light. Al and Peg were supposed to be crude, bigoted, and shallow, and their characters (like Archie Bunker and Homer Simpson) served primarily to show how idiotic those qualities are. Al Bundy wasn't the sort of character you'd emulate, but one you'd pity and laugh at. These were people who were so lazy and irresponsible and raised such pitiful children that having their daughter marry a rich guy (regardless of age) was the best they could hope for. It was certainly better than all the cretins she brought home who were closer to her age (most of whom did get beat up and thrown out by Al). I know some people miss the joke with that kind of humor sometimes, but I think people who are going to take Al Bundy's advice on pretty much anything are already too far gone for me to worry about.

There was a time when TV was purely for entertainment and nothing else. Somewhere along the line TV producers got the idea to use it as a means to teach a lesson, to preach a sermon about how to live, love and raise your kids. Every show became some kind of public service message. Most of the shows that came out from the early 70s through the 80s were of that ilk, either teaching a moral lesson or a political one like Archie Bunker and its spin offs. Every time you turned on the TV you were forced to ponder teen pregnancy, drug use, appropriate dating practices, alcohol abuse, etc., etc., etc....

I know some people here don't like Seinfeld, but what I like about it, and why I think it's so popular, is because it's a return to the "I Love Lucy" style of humor where it's just funny and there is no lesson. ("A show about nothing"). Seinfeld was the first time in probably 20 years that I actually enjoyed a comedy show.

True. But the "lesson" on Seinfeld is much more light-hearted than on those other shows. It makes us laugh at the shallow side of ourselves.

There was a show in the 1980s (I think it was "Different Strokes") where a kid actually died of an alcohol overdose on the episode. This is comedy? Too much for me...

The other off-beat sort of comedy, sort of drama that didn't really have a message was "Northern Exposure".

Interestingly, this show has a rare example of an AG couple on TV. Holland and Shelly were a 60-something / 20-something couple. Unusual to see that on TV (without it being scandalized!).

hi.. as the title says , i am new here. I found this sight looking for input on how to handle the latest chapter in my life.
I have been single a good 4 yrs or so , dating rarely. I just kinda gave up and was tired of being hurt and let down. oh..BTW i am single..never married no kids.... anyway i met someone a month ago , who i never in a 100 yrs would have thought i could fall for.he is 21 yrs older (1 yr younger then my dad) I have always dated younger...and to be as happy as i am with this man kinda blows me away. In my familys eyes i think they always think i'm screwing up. and my friends would go into shock if i tell them...luckily they all live 600 miles away.so for now there isnt a problem. I moved away from them all 6 months ago.
Not only is age a factor , but this man is an incredible world known music legend. I am as far away from the gold digger type as you can get, and i am so afraid of coming across anyone who will label me one. I have so much fun with him when we are together , and i have learned so much in history of the music industries greatest. but even if he wasnt who he was , i would still be with him. I am normally a shy quiet person , I have been trying to keep this quiet so as not to stir up all kind of commotion. There are a few locals that know we are together , and those few are very supportive and have even told me they have never seen him so happy in yrs.
I just dont know wether i'm more afraid of age comments or people thinking i am with him for other reasons.
Is there an easy way to tell people about this relationship , considering its totally out of my norm? and how do you handle the negative comments?

True. But the "lesson" on Seinfeld is much more light-hearted than on those other shows. It makes us laugh at the shallow side of ourselves.

There was a show in the 1980s (I think it was "Different Strokes") where a kid actually died of an alcohol overdose on the episode. This is comedy? Too much for me...

Having grown up in the 1980's, Different Strokes pushed a lot of boundaries with racial issues and many other difficulties that kids faced at the time. I remember one episode where one kid was being molested by a neighbor. Sometimes through popular culture, we can get important issues addressed, or at least talked about in households. It's a matter of awareness.

That's true, but people got tired of it. After dealing with serious problems in their own families, then watching the often depressing network news, and then having to watch a "comedy" show where a kid gets molested, or gets drunk and dies, or OD's on drugs, it got to be too much.

Seinfeld was a return to the more happy-go-lucky, almost slapsticky comedy of the "I Love Lucy" era, and people loved it!

You may have a point there. I remember some really bad TV after the late '80's. But Seinfeld wasn't one of them. Vandelay! Say Vandelay!

Ha!

".... you took a bite, and stuck the chip back in the dip. It's like sticking your whole mouth in the dip!...." :-)

Lol. Every since that episode, I'm forced to pay attention to people double-dipping!

"It may seem glamorous, but it's business as usual at Kramerica."

How do your current church members learn his age? If he's not attending, then they aren't seeing him. Are you telling them his age? Who brings up the age subject? Do they ask? Why would they ask if they've never met him?

Only a few even know I am seeing someone, engaged, and getting married in a few weeks. They know his age because they asked. It's a fairly common question to ask someone who is 20 something how old their bf or gf is. Usually I answer that he is older--sometime that is enough but other times they ask how much older or specifically how old is he. I've only told the people who I know do not gossip, which is why the rest of the church still doesn't know about our relationship.

He will only be coming with me to church a few times a year for special occasions. But we will be getting married the Saturday before Easter and he said he would come with me to church that next day. I am almost looking forward to seeing the response when people come up to greet the "visitor" and I get to introduce him as my husband. The age difference is visually obvious but I doubt anyone would ask to his face.