There were few kids in my son's sophomore class who turned 16 before December of their freshman year. There are plenty who turned 16 in the spring of freshman year and who started sophomore year as 16 year olds. It really does not matter. My point is that you have a 27 year old man looking for dates in a high school. I think it is a cause for concern.

But WHOSE concern is it, or should it be? Yours? Mine? That's the point. We are too far removed from the situation to have any valid concerns.

---

______________________________________________
DING DING!! Artmus speaks the truth!
100 miles a day is the only power meter you need.

The big question is ''why?''. Everyone keeps saying it's wrong, but there's absolutely zero objective analysis that applies the world over in this case. Everyone states their beliefs, but that doesn't make it wrong on a large scale. You don't like it. That's as far as it goes. The only people to whom it should be of real concern is the parties involved directly, and since they're fine with it, why in the blue fuck do you care?

And as I've already made pretty clear, the scenario of a 16 year old and 5 year old are entirely different from this in the context of S&R value, which, one more time for kicks, is the sole basis for ALL relationships. Either no one understands the basics of social dynamics, or you all firmly believe that most of your social actions are actually choices and not programmed responses. If they truly are choices, game theory goes out the window and we'll all marry supermodels with flawless personalities. Wonderful world that'd be.

Another point to be made is that oftentimes those who are the most vocal and public with their "concerns" about the behavior of others are the ones who are diddling little kids, trying to get gay sex in restrooms, etc. (I'm NOT accusing anyone on this board of those things; but I AM accusing many of the morality police out there who seem to make a living over condemning the behavior of people they don't even know.)

yep...!!!

But WHOSE concern is it, or should it be? Yours? Mine? That's the point. We are too far removed from the situation to have any valid concerns.

Well, clearly I am not in a position to do anything about it Mr. Boonen's dating habits. But, were a 27 year old man or woman hanging outside my kids' high school looking for dates, I would most certainly try to do something about it. And to the extent that this conversation gets others to think about the propriety of such relationships, then it is a good thing.

The big question is ''why?''. Everyone keeps saying it's wrong, but there's absolutely zero objective analysis that applies the world over in this case.

There is very little "objective evidence that applies the world over." So, if that is your test, then there really is very little to say. However, there is plenty of objective evidence regarding the social and psycological maturity of 16 year olds versus 27 year olds. That you choose to ignore it is not my problem. How many 27 year old men and women troll the halls of high schools and teen hangouts looking for dates? Not many. Check the marriage applications and see how many relationships include people of those ages or even 11 plus years apart. Sure there will be some but they will be few and far between. Why? Because it is not a normal pairing.

S&R value, which, one more time for kicks, is the sole basis for ALL relationships.

Now this is an entirely indefensible statement. Your slip is showing.

Wow, you're really misinformed.

No, it's an entirely defensible statement. You're an ignorant bint who understands about as much about social dynamics as I do bistromathics. You're telling me that natural selection no longer applies? Oh yeah, you think humans have evolved above evolution itself...

Ha you also seem to think that Boonen went to her school, camped outside the door and handed her candy to be his girlfriend.

What if the scenario were that your daughter dressed like a trashy trick and went to the local club on a Friday night and hooked up with a 27 year old? Clearly it's his fault then for being at a social gathering where younger individuals might congregate.

It is always fun to see the names people call others and the personal attacks they mount when they realize they have lost an argument and have nothing intelligent left to say. Thanks for not disappointing.

You totally overstated your natural selection argument and you know it. It is an interesting exercise to watch people flounder after they buy into a theory hook, line and sinker and realize that it just doesn't apply all the time. They stake so much on the absoluteness of their theories that when those theories are shown not to apply, all they can do is raise the level of the rhetoric and start calling names.

Totally predictable. Cheers.

I'm also waiting for a direct response to one of my posts, instead of this cute ballerina act you're pulling. A successful argument makes a counterpoint to every point, which you fail to do at every turn. Your responses consist wholly of ''you're wrong'' or ''no''. The best ones so far have absolutely nothing to do with anything and are general statements suggesting you're more enlightened than anyone else here.

I get the feeling that you were the 3.8+ student in high school that was revered as being 'brilliant' because of your tenacity, and went on to score sub-1100 on the SAT.

Sorry to disappoint. Phi Beta Kappa, Magna Cum Laude, double major, honors in both, Rhodes Scholar finalist.

Ah, the air of arrogance explained at last.

You also did just what I said you do. Your post selectively addressed only one part of mine, failing to counterpoint the larger, relevant point, and even then, consisted solely of ''you're wrong''.

You also give into goading and suggested disqualification, feeling the need to qualify yourself. But what do I know...social dynamics is a myth. We evolved above that.

You're worried about what she's like in the kitchen......What about the room down the hall to the left?!

Ah, the air of arrogance explained at last.

QED

$100 says he has to look that up to understand what you mean. :)

---

''The enemy isn't conservatism. The enemy isn't liberalism. The enemy is bulls**t.''

—Lars-Erik Nelson

* I haven't read all of the posts here, many but not all. I don't this scenereo has been posted; what if it were a 16 year old man with a 27 year old woman? I had a similar situation, although I was 21 not 16, I was perceived as a stud with all of her friends yet the men all cried doublestandard that if they were dating a 21 year old woman they'd be considered desperate. So, if the tables were turned, would it get the same attention?

Good lord this is like watching a train wreck. Can't we just agree that not all of us think this is bad, some of us wish it were us, and some of us have moved on already? The bottom line is that you are not going to convince someone on a message board, so let it go. If you were in person, you could at least resort to fist-a-cuffs, but you can't here, so we go round and round. Just agree to meet in public somewhere and beat the crap out of eachother, or better yet, plan a race ala Paulo and H20FUN and bash it out there. This is getting tiresome. End of sermon....

[reply]Sorry to disappoint. Phi Beta Kappa, Magna Cum Laude, double major, honors in both, Rhodes Scholar finalist.[/reply]

WhatEver

Well, you made $100, cuz I didn't have to look it up.

I'm quite aware that I'm coming off as arrogant, but I'm also presenting objectivity. You're not. That justifies one of us.

You know I was joking there, right?

this thread is hysterical. To quote the great Wooderson, "that's what I love about high school girls, no matter how old I get they stay the same age"

Mercx's original point is valid. WE as "cultured American's", find something morally reprehensible about making moves on teenagers. Let us just cut past the chaff and use the gifts that science has given us. Every heterosexual male would feel that familiar tingle in his groin after getting a nice close up look at the young supermodel. It does not matter if she was 16, sexual urges are essentially uncontrollable. That is the point Mercx is trying to make. There are certainly valid arguments for creating a society which censures these types of relationships. Yet still , they are societal creation's, nothing more, nothing less.
P.S. My undergrad regularly spits out Rhodes Scholars, what sets them apart from the rest of the student body is not their intelligence, but that they are Rhodes Scholars.