E.g., if you’re 40, the youngest you would date would be 40 / 2 + 7 = 27.

This was the golden rule when I was growing up, and I’m wondering if it still holds up. It should obviously never be a hard limit, but I’ve found it serves as a decent guide in the past. What do you think?

40 comments

  1. Doesn’t really make sense at extremes, is a decent rule of thumb if you want to guide yourself by age.

  5. I don’t see age gap as bad at all. No matter who’s older. As long as both people are happy with each other and there’s no teacher/student power dynamics, and they are both adult. 40 and 27 is okay.

  6. I won’t lie it depends I mean I hate younger women and wouldn’t like anything below 2 years of my age but for older women I have a larger capacity

  7. I agree, everybody who is saying that age doesn’t matter need to take a good look at these relationships. Cause they never last.

  10. I think it’s fine. Personally, I’d never do more than 5 years up or down for a proper relationship, but hooking up, I’d probably go down to early 20s. I’m 31 for reference.

  11. I personally stick to 25+ but as long as everyone is a legal adult I don’t care.

    People who make issues out of this shit are busy bodies trying to police other peoples relationships or people projecting their own insecurities.

  12. I went on a couple of dates with somebody like 17 years older than me. They brought that rule up, did the math in front of me, and said my age is exactly at the bare minimum.

    I could tell they were uncomfortable by the age difference, and they said I look younger than my age.

    i’m OK with that age thing but it seems that there’s a lot of other stuff circulating around it. It’s not as straightforward as just a number. There’s a lot of social stigma.

  13. It’s a rule primarily used to shame people for their age difference with their partner, and hardly ever to actually “find out” if you “can” date someone – so it can pretty much go to hell.

    Everyone is different and complex, and potential compatibility can’t be captured by some silly small formula.

  14. Dating assumes you have long term goals together, and try to figure out if you can go there together.

    The age rules are just a quick and dirty way to ascertain whether the two of you could share goals. Big age differences tend to come with misalignments of goals, which means dating then is just a big waste of lifetime for at least one of the two.

  15. Is this some sort of equation that draws the line between legit dating and a creeper?

  20. Assuming you work a traditional job, I feel like people change a LOT during their first 2-3 years of being on their own and having full time permanent work. And then they kind of find their way and I’m not sure they change all that much after that until/unless they have a kid. So I think people from about 25 to about double that can be pretty compatible.

  21. Do whatever you want, as long as it’s legal. Personally I try not to stray more than five years from my age. The younger ones don’t have enough experience to be interesting and the older ones generally some complex about their age or some other hangup.

  22. I’ve always seen that rule as more of a protection for the older person in the relationship than the younger – and I’m not talking about legal protection. Protecting your sanity. Sure……..a 60 year old can legally date an 18 year old, but that’s liable to be A LOT to handle and one just not mentally and physically up to it. But generally speaking, if they are over 25 years old most people don’t care about the optics of it.

  24. It’s a silly made up “rule.” It’s intention is to promote another excused for feminist anti-men hate.

  25. Complete bs. Another great example of trying to box in life – as if everything needs to abide by laws.

  27. if you use a mathematical formula to decide who you should and shouldn’t date that already tells me absolutely everything i need to know about you.

  28. Does that also apply for greater your age?

    So 40 / 2 – 7 + 40 = 53. Therefore your dating range would be 28 to 53?

    Me personally, when I was dating I was looking at +/- 5 years of my age. Because I wanted us to have common experiences growing up.

  30. Not a good rule if you’re 20 or below, that will land you in jail where I live lol.

  31. I’m 46 which would make my minimum number with the math be 30. That seems to hold very true for me at least. I’ve dated girls in their 20’s recently and it just feels too young. 30-39 yr old women are my wheelhouse.

  33. It’s not a rule; but a solid guideline

    I don’t think I’d have any interest in someone below 1/2 my age + 7

  35. I’m 26, but even thinking about dating a 20 makes me feel like a pedophile. Like, have you spoken to a 20 year old?

    I prefer someone who’s my age or a little older, but 22-23 is where I don’t feel super weird.

  36. No.

    I’m 45. My age ranges have varied. At 35 I was considering plus or minus 10 years okay. At 45 narrower, plus or minus 7 or 8 years.

    You learn things as you go along in life that other people have not learned who are that much younger than you. I’m not anxious to go through the drama that ensues before they learn them.

  37. Ultimately if it’s legal then you’re free to do whatever you want but me personally, 10 year gap is too much, and the further that gap is the creepier it is.

  38. I ignore it. I don’t let society or other people tell me who I should be attracted to and who I should not.

  39. I think it’s a good rule. 26 and 20 sounds okay, 80 and 47 is quite a jump but if both are willing.

    I’m seriously creeped out by people 30+ going for 18-23 year olds, that’s just predatory (doesn’t matter what genders).

  40. >This was the golden rule when I was growing up, and I’m wondering if it still holds up. It should obviously never be a hard limit, but I’ve found it serves as a decent guide in the past. What do you think?

    Dumb.

    If I’m 40, and I can pull and date 22year olds, you’re damn right i’m going to.

Leave a Reply
You May Also Like