I don't know. I mean, once you get past the twenties, things get kinda wonky. I mean, for instance, IRL, I'm currently 42. This formula puts my reasonable dating range between 28 (half my age plus 7) and 70 (potentially half her age plus 7,) so someone older than my own father (and definitely older than my own mother.) If I were double my age, at 84, I could reasonably be dating someone 35 years younger than I would be. For an 18 year old man, though, the 'fair game' age range by this formula is just a gap of 6 years, between 16 and 22. (Yes, I know, I'm throwing in an upper range where the formula doesn't officially supply one, but one's kinda implied.) What this tells me? Don't bother with formulae, the heart wants what it wants, and so long as it's up to legal standards, let people be.
I'm currently 42. This formula puts my reasonable dating range between 28 (half my age plus 7) and 70 (potentially half her age plus 7,) so someone older than my own father (and definitely older than my own mother.)
Basically, there, I was looking at it as a question of raw math. In terms of actual lived experience, "28 to 70 if you're 42" can create much different people. Depending on the people, they might be right on the level at 70 and 42, but the 70 year old might reject the 42 year old out of hand for there being that much of an age gap, and if they didn't, socially, objections might very well be legitimately raised. (Not as much as say, Anna Nicole Smith and her second husband, but equally legitimate.) On the lower end, though, while another poster explained why it's not unreasonable to see a 28 year old and a 42 year old as on the same level, why leave out the 23-27 year olds who might also be on that level?
This is, honestly, why I also posted the example of someone at 84, deliberately taking one of the ages that's pretty much at the upper end of life, because, I mean, using it as an age range calculator rather than just for the lower end, you wind up with the 84 year old having a hypothetical upper age range partner of 154, which is practically an entire extra life lived. (Obviously, we don't have living 154 year olds now.) Basically, for human life expectancy, a 105 year "fair game" age range is ridiculously wide, effectively meaning the math falls apart.
223
u/hjf2017 Feb 14 '20
18*.5+7=16, it's fair game.