Comment

You’re technically correct, but I was counting on a bit of “poetic freedom”. Write as octal, read as decimal.

The post does mention age, not explicitly, but it is what the post is about.

2000 - 1984 = 16

2000 - 1959 = 41

I don’t care about legality, this is borderline predatory and therefor wrong. Maybe they’re still happily married and (without more context) I’m sure OP loves their parents (so would I), but that doesn’t change how I look at this.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Zagorath@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

I don’t care about legality

That would still make it illegal in most western countries though

That’s what I was responding to.

source
- abbadon420@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Haha you got me there XD I’m talking in circles.
  
  My sister started dating someone of 40 when she was 23. That was already a bit of a shock in my family, but it’s okay. I just can’t imagine anyone feeling fine with the situation OP describes. But yeah, it’s probably not technically illegal.
  
  source
  - Zagorath@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    I mean yeah, morally speaking, the half+7 rule works shockingly well. It’s just not entirely reasonable for the law to encode something like that though, so there’s always going to be a line somewhere. 16 seems reasonable to me (but then, I’m also a supporter of lowering the voting age to 16…)
    
    source