Creepiness Avoidance

Now I know why people are freaked out by the creepiness factor when seeing people dating (or getting married) where those people's age gap is so huge. Some cartoonist (who may have gotten it elsewhere) put it into an easy to remember formula:

[(older person's age/2) + 7] where the older person doesn't date/marry anyone who is under this age. When the age is younger than the legal age of consent, your dating pool shrinks until that lowest allowable age equals the legal age of consent. What therefore, defines the upper age range? Add 7 years to our age?

Therefore, unlike the comic strip, an 18 y/o's dating range is NOT 16-22, but rather 18-25.

The age of consent is tricky, because if it is 16, but the other person is 18 and above, then one of the people is considered an adult, the other not. Seems unequal.

Again, if one is 18 and the other 21, then it is again unequal because one person is limited to the types of activities and locations they are allowed by society. A 21 y/o can go to a bar, an 18 y/o cannot. And forget about the 16 y/o.

Then there is the supposed 'age of reason' of 25... which is best known by those of us who wait(ed) for our insurance rates to go down. It has something to do with our biological maturity, I believe. I did hear what exactly it was based on the other night but cannot remember it.

There is the possibility of people (above the age of consent perhaps, above the age of reason more probably) with a vast amount of age between them to understand and love one another... but there is an 'ick factor' involved at that point in the eyes of society. This ick factor was once more geared toward May-December romances where the December was a woman but has now expanded to include the male Decembers as well.

It comes down to a balance and availability of resources and the power structures that control that balance and availability. Which is why, when the December is rich, it is more acceptable to society. This doesn't make it "right" either way. Although it would be interesting to see what would result from an equalized society where all needs are met without needing to worry about them (i.e. food, water, shelter, clothing, health care, etc.). What would happen to the mating practices? It would no longer be ruled by an unconscious, or otherwise, need to find someone who can or someone to "take care of."

Hat tip to crasch

This was also prompted by this women's studies community post about this website. Which brings our creepy ick factor to maximum.

I find it interesting that if you reorder the spacing between the words (brought on by looking at the all-male cast of contacts for the company):

Marr Your Daughter

The misspelling of mar is apropos of the whole mindset of this community of selling young, underaged, female girls off to men who have the money to pay for them.

Update: Someone found that Snopes has passed sentence on the website, naming it a likely hoax. However, the question remains. Are we disbelieving it because it is American girls that are for sale? Because, I am pretty damn sure they exist, whether on the net or IRL, these companies. Bride prices ARE still being paid. Women ARE still being sold off in arranged marriages. The closer a society perceives its individuals as being equal to each other, the more disturbed it will be by things of this nature. However, other societies are still being viewed as "other" and it is humanity as a whole that must grow disturbed by things of this nature, no matter to whom it is happening. The more inclusive we get, the better off all people will be. That goes for animals, regardless of the sentience question... because if you aren't equal to another person in the eyes of society, you are being considered in a spectrum that includes animals and beings considered non-sentient.

The episode of Star Trek, The Next Generation, where Data is on trial to determine his humanity is a perfect example of this. The decision of expanding the concept of "do unto others" as well as the concept of 'I am both myself, and the other.'

Age of Reason, continued...

Earlier today, I made a post where I mentioned the “age of reason” in an offhand manner. The age I quoted was 25, according to a source I couldn’t remember. I was called on that; and I decided to go digging around to see what I could see. Ruby Rod would be proud. Super-green?

I have culled evidence from various sites. Enjoy!

Wisdom teeth, also known as third molars, are the last teeth to erupt in your mouth. This generally occurs between the ages of 17 and 25, a time of life that has been called the "Age of Wisdom." Via The American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

According to the Catholic Church, as quoted from the Catholic Encyclopedia, the age of reason is defined as follows:

The name given to that period of human life at which persons are deemed to begin to be morally responsible. This, as a rule, happens at the age of seven, or thereabouts, though the use of reason requisite for moral discernment may come before, or may be delayed until notably after, that time. At this age Christians come under the operation of ecclesiastical laws, such as the precept of assistance at Mass on Sundays and holy days, abstinence from meat on certain days, and annual confessions, should they have incurred mortal sin. The obligation of Easter Communion literally understood applies to all who have reached "the years of discretion"; but according to the practical interpretation of the Church it is not regarded as binding children just as soon as they are seven years old. At the age of reason a person is juridically considered eligible to act as witness to a marriage, as sponsor at baptism or confirmation, and as a party to the formal contract of betrothal; at this age one is considered capable of receiving extreme unction, of being promoted to first tonsure and minor orders, of being the incumbent of a simple benefice (beneficium simplex) if the founder of it should have so provided; and, lastly, is held liable to ecclesiastical censures. In the present discipline, however, persons do not incur these penalties until they reach the age of puberty, unless explicitly included in the decree imposing them. The only censure surely applicable to persons of this age is for the violation of the clausura of nuns, while that for the maltreatment, suadente diabolo, of clerics is probably so.

I did end up finding the source of my use of 25 years old as the Age of Reason, it is an NIH study described in this Washington Post article about brain immaturity and its relation to vehicular crashes. I’ve quoted bits and pieces below, the full article is at the end of the post:
( Read more... )