Last edited Thu Sep 12, 2013, 06:03 PM - Edit history (1)

Sexy is sexy.

I had a patient once whose wife was in her late 70's. She was just breathtakingly beautiful. Astonishingly so. I didn't find her sexually attractive, because I don't think in those terms when dealing with patients or their family members. But I saw incredible beauty.

OTOH, I've got a raging crush on Helen Mirren. She could give lessons in sexy to women 1/3 her age...

On edit: That's UPPER age limit.

I've said in other posts that for me, any women younger than me is really too young. I feel creepy finding myself attracted to women younger than about 35. I'm 44.

For me, about 40 would be the lower limit. Obviously 18 is the lower legal limit.

the age spread makes a difference too

Now my lower limit seems to be 30, in most cases*

I think if everyone is a consenting adult, age differences, while externally weird to some folks, are not that big deal and no one else's business. Also, obviously, as people get older larger age spreads don't matter. For instance, 60-50 is not as jarring as 30-20, etc.

...I think if you're the guy who is 50 and is constantly going to clubs to hit on 20 year old women, no amount of online rationalizing will remove the air of creep from your deal.


* Yes. I admit it, I find Emily Ratajowski attractive, and she's like 22 or 23. So sue me.

Beauty is beauty, be it Helen Mirren or Diane Lane Amanda Seyfried or anyone in between.

I don't know anyone in my age group who hits on 20 year olds in bars or anywhere else. One has had a few dalliances with his undergrad students though. That's creepy regardless of how it started.

She was gorgeous when she was younger, too.

Mercedes Ruehl is another 60ish hottie, with terrific head of hair and latino features.



But rumor has it the body is refurbished.

Her quote to me was "She could teach you boys a thing or two"

The most I will ever say about a teenage girl is that "She's going to grow up to be a very attractive woman".

Aside from a girlfriend who was 18 when I was 27 (and yeah, I knew her when she was 17 and we would have hooked up then, but I steered clear of that situation) I've never really had the issue.

you responded to the OP.

Look, even stupid questions can get answered. Seriously, WTF.

that's indicative of exactly nothing.

every single damn person who responded here said "adults".

Looking the other way at creepiness is creepy too. Too many men don't get that part.
Flew right over your head, eh?

Which proves something real egregious, obviously.

it looks like people were creeped out and didn;t want to engage. No one joined in as if it was okay, did they?
I think it was a fucked up reaction to a very fucked up situation described in the OP.

The statement about oogling young girls- what do you think that was about? Something that is actually a serious issue for many women as opposed to - guys getting castrated by women. Which is incredibly fucking rare.
So, you could get real about it, and admit that thread was creepy and that kind of creepiness is way too common and overlooked- even at DU. Or you could go piss and moan about castration instead, as an excuse to look the other way. Which is a shitty and gutless way to go- but at least you won;t piss off the bros -right?

that he meant adult interactions, albeit those of the may-december sort.

Yes, "oogling" young girls is creepy. Adults who are "attracted" to people under 18 have a serious fucking mental problem. These things go without saying, as does the idea that committing mass acts of sexual mutilation on teenage boys is a bad idea.

I'm personally done churning the outrage butter with this thread, though. I've said all I need to say.

I have no doubt that it will provide at least a couple months' supply, so you can thank the OP for that.

At Fri Sep 13, 2013, 08:40 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

My 1st response contained the word "creep". So would you categorize this statement as "creepy", too?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1114&pid=10049

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Calling out a Duer not in a debate by linking to an old post, rather than engaging with the person he is having the conversation with is uncalled for, all the more so given the fact he's defending an OP asking about being attracted to underage girls. How can defending that stuff by okay on DU?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Sep 13, 2013, 08:47 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Wheeeeee! Somebody's pissed at the Men's group. Again. That poster isn't the OP the alerter is upset about, maybe they should 'engage' with the person who posted it instead of Warren D, who as far as I've seen hasn't defended anything. Try harder.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: just calm down everyone....
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Stay out of groups that you don't agree with. This is a bogus alert just to try to get Warren knocked out of it. Not hard to figure out who alerted either. Leave.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Churn, Churn, Churn!

really? no touching. just lust... leer??? at a child.

some men say, once she hits puberty, free game. you have heard that one, i am sure. well, some girls hit it at ten. so i guess at ten, lusting/leering at a girl is .... ya know, ok. as long as you are not touching.

So since you've established that the asking of the question is fuel for another round, maybe you can point out which of the answers (besides yours) actually say any of that shit in your reply?

And if no one had responded, that would have been another outrage, right?

It's a win-win. See, I know how this shit works, particularly with the way crap gets deliberately misrepresented.

I'm no longer a host of this group, in case you haven't been paying attention. I got sick of exactly this sort of bullshit game-playing. So it's not my problem.

would you categorize a statement like this as "creepy"?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/125525338#post1

Or should I have lunch first.

things that no one has actually said, and then pretend that those are the responses to the (pretty clearly trolling, IMHO) question.

However, if someone asks a question "Is it okay to chop peoples' heads off" and everyone who answers says "fuck no" it's pretty disingenuous to pretend that somehow that is a mass apologia for head-chopping.

than five years older.

There's a difference between finding someone attractive (you think they're pretty) and finding someone sexually attractive (they turn you on sexually). I recognized that some of my daughters friends were attractive when they were 15-16, but there was no sexual attraction. They were pretty, and that was it. Nowadays I consider some of my now-20 year old daughters friends to be sexually attractive, and I had countless young college students in my lectures over the years who I considered to be sexually attractive, but they were all adults. Young adults, but still adults.

If you're lusting after kids, it's ALWAYS creepy. When you're talking about adults, creepiness is more a matter of behavior than thoughts. There's nothing wrong with recognizing that a young woman is sexually attractive, but there is something VERY wrong with communicating that attraction in a way she dislikes. Most 20 year old women don't want to be hit on by 45 year old men. Appreciating beauty is one thing, but when it devolves into flirting, leering, or catcalls, you've crossed the border into Creepytown.

And never forget the "Man Law". My dad taught me this when I was a teenager. If you want to know the minimum age that you can flirt with without being "creepy", follow this rule: Divide your age in half, rounding down if needed, and add 7.

In other words, if you're 13, you shouldn't be hitting on girls under 13.

At 16, your minimum is 15.

If you're 20, your bottom age is 17.

If you're 30, leave them alone if they're under 22.

If you're 60, you can flirt with 37 year olds.

Anything under that and you're opening yourself up to accusations of pervyness. While love knows no age boundaries, young women on the street don't like it when little old men try to pick them up.

I am old and monogamous and have been as such for decades (monogamous, not old). In fact I have dropped a couple of friends due to their cheating on their wives, who were also friends. I also knew a HS teacher/coach who was a serial dater of his former students. He would usually wait until they were 2 years removed from HS to date them (around 20-21). He was still doing this well into his 40's. I thought that was pretty, er, unseemly, and talked to each of my daughters about him when they were attending that HS. So it's not my style, but being somewhat of a keep-to-myself person (actually quite straight-laced in my own life - liberal when it comes to other's lives) I figured, well, it's his thing, and everyone is of the age of consent, so...?

I didn't anticipate the onslaught from the other group, and can't fathom what this has to do with MRA, but like I say I am pretty open-minded wrt what other do with their private lives.

Apparently I have opened myself up to accusations of perviness just by bring up the subject of May-December lust (or March-October). C'est la guerre

leaves the door open to accusations of creepiness.

I mean, the shitstorm was entirely predictable- right up to the combination of yowling outrage over remonstrations that people should have made to you but didn't, or didn't quickly enough, along with the flagrant just making shit up out of whole cloth and then pretending as if they were things people actually said in response... (an old favorite)

but that said, we have concepts like "consenting adults" for a reason, as much as some love to pretend that any adult who does stuff that pisses them off or they don't agree with, deserves to be treated like a child with no agency who can't possibly consent.

You would do well to make it extra clear in the future when you're asking these sorts of questions, that you're clearly talking about consenting adults and not trying to justify or make some sideways argument for child abuse.

I was absolutely NOT making any argument, implied or otherwise, for child abuse. I was thinking more of the Seinfeld-Soshana situation - creepy? Lucky bastard? Good for him, not my thing? What about Michael & Catherine? Murphy Jones and Emma?

Sorry, members of HoF and Feminists. I was not condoning and would not condone or suggest pedophilia. I was mostly just wondering aloud on a pretty free-thinking site what are the bounds of acceptable/normal physical relationships. I am a lifelong feminist, husband of feminist, father of feminists. Apologies for the crude approach to what I intended to be a discussion point for seasoned, sane, healthy men. If you would like the OP deleted to clear out the stench, say the word and it will be gone.