Oh Lauren (wearinghispurity)...You are so SMRT.

[NurseNell]

Well, we all have our own definitions of obscene, of course. I have an 8-year-old. The idea that a currently 19-year-old adult man could be interested in her in a few more years is pretty obscene to me.

Of course, I don't know anyone who'd think differently. But there comes a time when 11 years isn't that big of a difference. Whether or not it was or wasn't in Lauren's case depends on whether 15 or 16 y.o.'s are old enough for marriage. I'd say it's too young but obviously her parents didn't think so. So a 15 y.o. and a 26 y.o., maybe not. An 18 y.o. and a 29 y.o. maybe. A 20 y.o. and a 31 y.o. , no.

[Vex]

What makes me the most sad, is that if she read this thread, she would show it to her pervert of a husband and they would either laugh at our ignorance, or pity us because we're so judgemental and nasty.

She'd never understand that we're disgusted because he's taken advantage of her, and her parents basically sold her to an adult man as a house-cleaning, baby-making factory before she was even old enough to know who she is.

She was a baby. She still IS a baby. Babies do not need to be having babies or getting married. Especially when it's as 'intentional' and ritualistic as their courtship/marriage was and their lifestyle is. This isn't a man who met her casually and after a lot of time the gradually feel in love and eventually decided to marry. He intended to marry her the entire time he knew her. It's fucked up beyond belief.

[NurseNell]

What makes me the most sad, is that if she read this thread, she would show it to her pervert of a husband and they would either laugh at our ignorance, or pity us because we're so judgemental and nasty.

She'd never understand that we're disgusted because he's taken advantage of her, and her parents basically sold her to an adult man as a house-cleaning, baby-making factory before she was even old enough to know who she is.

She was a baby. She still IS a baby. Babies do not need to be having babies or getting married. Especially when it's as 'intentional' and ritualistic as their courtship/marriage was and their lifestyle is. This isn't a man who met her casually and after a lot of time the gradually feel in love and eventually decided to marry. He intended to marry her the entire time he knew her. It's fucked up beyond belief.

And the majority of these fundies are horrified by MTV's show 15 and Pregnant. I'm horrified by it too but it's because I think 125 is too young for either marriage or a baby. To the fundies it's OK to be a virgin getting married as a teenager but not to be an unmarried teen having sex.

[Wolfie]

100 years ago, women were valued for their ability to bear children and keep a home. Why not marry early? Adolescence was not realy existent at the time; children functioned as adults from a young age.

Now it seems creepy to me because we expect married couples to be companions and friends. Also, we allow children to take their time in transitioning to adulthood. A man should have nothing in common with a young teen girl, who in modern times is still very much a child.

100 years ago, women tended to marry when over 18, and usually in their 20's. Not any younger than we think of as normal. Even if the average age has gotten older, we still accept those ages as acceptable.

It was rare situations that women were married at 15 or 16 or younger. Usually it was either a poor family, or a strange process to get more land when land grants were issued by the government. (the poorer you were, the more likely you were to marry young. So yeah, so much for imitating the upper class in this case.)

[medievalist1980]

Wolfie, I thought it was the opposite, that the wealthier you were the more likely you were to marry young, while the working classes waited for marriage in order to save money? At least, that is how it was in the middle ages and early modern era in europe, though things could have changed in the modern era of course.

[ridethekick]

You know, the amount of people pearl clutching over Lauren and Nathan's age difference really bugs me. Yes, object to the fact that her husband is likely a patriarchal arse, object to the fact that her parents effectively chose her husband for her, and object to the fact that they married her off when she was still so damn young, and most likely hadn't developed an identity of her own, but don't assume that just because a couple has an age difference like this, that the younger party is being taken advantage of, and that their relationship is based on something sinister.

I started dating my now husband when I was 17 and he was 29. He is not, and never has been a creeper. I pursued him, we had a one night stand, and the rest is history. I was always old for my age, and he was, well, bless his heart, he was always a little young. When I met him, he owned and ran the LAN cafe I used to play games at, so we had a fair few shared interests, friends and we were at similar life stages (we were both about to embark on tertiary education). Once I graduated high school, we lived together for almost 4 years before getting married recently. I'm no subservient wall flower, I've worked full time in a very male dominated industry (construction) for the past three years and I excel at what I do, I'm also just about to graduate with a degree in construction management. I am proud of the man I chose. We have a fantastic relationship, in which he supports me and my goals completely. We've also just survived his cancer diagnosis and treatment, so fuck anyone who says that relationships like ours are wrong, or not rooted in companionship.

The hysteria I see here (and in other places) surrounding age differences shows a lack of imagination regarding other people's circumstances and a spectacular lack of respect for other people's choices. I personally would hate to have an open or poly relationship. I know it wouldn't work for me, and I know I wouldn't be happy in one, so I haven't had one, end of story. I'm not out there going THESE PEOPLE WHO HAVE MADE CHOICES DIFFERENT TO ME ARE CREEPY AND WRONG!!! There are a lot of problematic factors surrounding Lauren's story, but the age difference in and of itself is not one of them. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with Lauren's story if they'd met when she was say, 16, they'd dated for a few years, and she'd had some experiences like travel or study, and if she hadn't been raised in a culture where she was expected to be subservient to the men in her life.

ETA: And before anyone jumps in with "but statutory rape / the age of consent!11!!" it's 16 here in Australia, we've always been legal.

[emmiedahl]

I did not mean that women routinely married at early ages in times past, merely that it was more normal/less creepy in that era because of different societal expectations.

My husband is 20 years older than me, but we began dating when I was well into adulthood. I was mature for my age; he is youthful for his. I knew he was older, but I thought like a decade older? I had already pegged him as marriage material when we compared ages and I never looked back.

Differences:

I had dated and knew what I was looking for.

Because I had a child, many of my potential suitors were older. I was not into guys my age because they were in a different stage in life.

My father had nothing to do with it.

My husband is a lot cuter than that guy.

I was legally an adult, and YES that matters.

D did not marry me because I was malleable or virginal or whatever.

I have always been an equal partner in our marriage and not a subordinate.

[Witsec7]

For me the age differential between the two fundies is problematic because it was a manipulated relationship. The young woman was being groomed by her father for a particular man. I don't see that behavior in your relationship RTK. You made a choice on the man you wanted, he wasn't presented to you by your father nor were your actions, courtship and wedding manipulated by your father.

As a mother I'd probably get a bit stiff necked at my DD had she been having a relationship with a 27 yo male. But she was a bit more worldly and streetwise than the fundy child at age 17. I too, could not object because when I was 18 I had a long term relationship with someone 10 years older than myself. This was of my choosing and not my parents. I was far more worldly and insightful about human relationships in general at 18 than the child we are discussing.

[NurseNell]

Wolfie, I thought it was the opposite, that the wealthier you were the more likely you were to marry young, while the working classes waited for marriage in order to save money? At least, that is how it was in the middle ages and early modern era in europe, though things could have changed in the modern era of course.

Most of my genealogy I've done to date has been in the 1700 and 1800's. My two grandfathers' lines were upper middle class, my two grandmothers' lines were poor immigrants. In all 4 lines marriages were mostly in the early to mid 20's.

[ridethekick]

For me the age differential between the two fundies is problematic because it was a manipulated relationship. The young woman was being groomed by her father for a particular man. I don't see that behavior in your relationship RTK. You made a choice on the man you wanted, he wasn't presented to you by your father nor were your actions, courtship and wedding manipulated by your father.

As a mother I'd probably get a bit stiff necked at my DD had she been having a relationship with a 27 yo male. But she was a bit more worldly and streetwise than the fundy child at age 17. I too, could not object because when I was 18 I had a long term relationship with someone 10 years older than myself. This was of my choosing and not my parents. I was far more worldly and insightful about human relationships in general at 18 than the child we are discussing.

Thanks, I think you hit the nail on the head. The choices I made were mine and mine alone. To say that young women shouldn't be able to make these kind of choices is just infantilising and denies women their autonomy.

[Wolfie]

Wolfie, I thought it was the opposite, that the wealthier you were the more likely you were to marry young, while the working classes waited for marriage in order to save money? At least, that is how it was in the middle ages and early modern era in europe, though things could have changed in the modern era of course.

In general it was early-mid 20's from everything I've read, for all classes. But the younger ones tended to be lower class, but only in some situations- such as if you could be given more land if you had a spouse. More specialized situations where a man might basically pay a family to take an underage bride so he could get more land. Also the fact that upper class had more access to abortions if there was an "oops" while the lower income didn't have the funding for them.

[Boogalou]

I think also because they are fundie her young age is even more of an issue. She is probably a lot more immature than most "worldly" 15/16 year old people are. I also find it INCREDIBLY weird that she had to get ready for a wedding every day that was going to happen sometime in a three week period. What is that all about? Was that for the first wedding or the legal one? How do you organize flowers and such for that? Unless she/her husband picked them out and left and then her father told them what date they were needed for. So, so strange.

[liltwinstar]

I don't think the age difference itself is that creepy. But thinking that your daughter is ready for marriage at what, 14? 15? That's creepy!

If she was 20 and he was 35 when they met/married, that would raise my eyebrows (I won't lie), but I wouldn't call it creepy.

We have a friend who, at 34, routinely dates women in the 18-20 range. Then he gets mad about all the "drama" in his relationships...gee, wonder what's causing that? :think:

[emmiedahl]

I think the 3 week thing was her mom. Yeah, it runs in the family. (sigh)

If I had not had a child already, I would not have gotten married so young to someone so much older than me. That is absolutely true, even though I love my husband and love our marriage and love our family. I tell my daughters that they need to have degrees and a career and vast life experience and THEN get married. I cannot believe that the mother in this case was not of the same opinion. I guess in patriarchy, you are not allowed to go into regret mode, but nonetheless... The mother was probably not allowed input anyway.

[Witsec7]

Thanks, I think you hit the nail on the head. The choices I made were mine and mine alone. To say that young women shouldn't be able to make these kind of choices is just infantilising and denies women their autonomy.

I maintain she wasn't given any choices.

edited to add: Was she even aware of any legal impediments to the relationship? This was a girl in a cloister. At 15 my DD hat the hots for some 16 yo, she was kinda interested in a 17 yo, but I didn't even need to address the situation, she declared the age gap impacted their social contacts.

[atheistjd]

Thanks, I think you hit the nail on the head. The choices I made were mine and mine alone. To say that young women shouldn't be able to make these kind of choices is just infantilising and denies women their autonomy.

I agree with the above... My best friend was 17 and her husband 32 when they first met - a decade later, they are happily married with kids. She was mature and looked older, and he was pretty immature for his age and younger-looking.

To be honest, what really creeped me out about Lauren's story was that she was basically at home, living with her younger siblings, and admitted that marriage (and maybe even sexual attraction) was not even on her radar... She was not a mature for her age, sexually and emotionally prepared older teeenager/young adult. She was a child. Whose parents GAVE her away - there was no autonomy or free will involved...

[Shirley MacLaine]

I've dated somewhat younger and much older (over 20 years) men, mostly casually. I'm really not opposed to a large age difference in general... one of my favorite friend relationships is a 32 year old woman and a 22 year old man, they've been together for four years. I don't think it's pearl-clutching or out of bounds to be concerned about the "age of consent!11!!" as ridethekick put it, and I do find the idea of dating a teenager abhorrent. Fifteen is young, and particularly in the case of the mother where they 'courted' for years... he first saw 'her heart for God' when she was much younger. And I have no qualms about calling that shit creepy.

[ridethekick]

To be honest, what really creeped me out about Lauren's story was that she was basically at home, living with her younger siblings, and admitted that marriage (and maybe even sexual attraction) was not even on her radar... She was not a mature for her age, sexually and emotionally prepared older teeenager/young adult. She was a child. Whose parents GAVE her away - there was no autonomy or free will involved...

I agree. From the looks of it, it doesn't seem like she'd had any adult experiences. When I was her age, I'd lived in France by myself for 4 months, was involved in my school newspaper, and had a job. Oh, and I'd gone through a few sexual partners :D. Had Lauren even been to the grocery store without a chaperone?

And to boot, she was raised in a belief system that says women don't have any autonomy, and their worth is a function of their relationship to others. Totally functional relationship, right there.

[clibbyjo]

I agree with the above... My best friend was 17 and her husband 32 when they first met - a decade later, they are happily married with kids. She was mature and looked older, and he was pretty immature for his age and younger-looking.

To be honest, what really creeped me out about Lauren's story was that she was basically at home, living with her younger siblings, and admitted that marriage (and maybe even sexual attraction) was not even on her radar... She was not a mature for her age, sexually and emotionally prepared older teeenager/young adult. She was a child. Whose parents GAVE her away - there was no autonomy or free will involved...

Exactly. If they got married when she was 15, he must have been checking her out since she was at least 14. Look at her wedding pictures, she is a baby and has no worldly experience and should not have been married off so young. I have a 12 year old daughter and I would have any man arrested who so much as looked at her.13 year old boys are bad enough. She can date when she is 16+,but if she brought home a grown ass man in his 30's asking to marry her I would have him arrested no matter how mature she thought she was.

[Olivia]

Now, I do think this is worse because this poor girl was 'groomed' for this lifestyle and it was at best endorsed, and at worst pushed, by her parents. But I'll clutch my pearls at any extreme age difference I like when one of the parties is a teenager. A man who is in his mid-20's to 30's who is immature shouldn't marry a teenager; he should work on maturing and being capable of pursuing a woman nearer his own age.

I remember being 14 and flattered by some 20-year-old asshat who was paying attention to me. My dad asked, "What's wrong with him that he isn't attracted, or attractive to, women his own age?" And he had a damn good point.

Yeah, maybe some happy marriages start that way. Some happy marriages start with kids who get knocked up at fifteen and married, too. But you're not going to convince me that just because there are some anomalies, we're talking about something that's not unhealthy and just a bit skeevy.

[erunerune]

A legal adult who thinks that marrying someone underage is actually a good idea should automatically be ruled out as a potential spouse in my opinion. And yeah, I'm big on the whole "age of consent" thing, as arbitrary as that may be, at least for consistency's sake: In the US, the under-18 set can't vote or buy liquor, so why they can get legally married in most states is ridiculous in my opinion.

In the case of the super-mature, super-prepared and/or life experienced hypothetical minor, I say who cares? Anyone older (including potential relationship partners) who has an interest in the well-being of said minor should want him/her to have a chance to grow up and know his/herself better before making a decision as major as marriage. I agree that there are exceptions to everything, but I still think it's better to err on the side of caution and concern for the potential teen bride/groom and just freaking wait until they are legal.

[medievalist1980]

emmie, sorry, didn't mean to misconstrue/over generalize your statement. :)

wolfie, that makes sense about the lower classes. i think when i am thinking "upper classes" i am really thinking aristocratic weddings as oppsed to the whole "upper class."

nell, glad to know that your research bears out what i have read! i'm a big fan of demographics.

sorry everyone, the whole "everyone got married young and had lots of babies a hundred years ago" is right up there as a pet peeve of mine with "women never worked before the feminist movement and the 1960s!" uh, yeah.

alright, back to the actual fundy at hand :)

[Effie]

Now, I do think this is worse because this poor girl was 'groomed' for this lifestyle and it was at best endorsed, and at worst pushed, by her parents. But I'll clutch my pearls at any extreme age difference I like when one of the parties is a teenager. A man who is in his mid-20's to 30's who is immature shouldn't marry a teenager; he should work on maturing and being capable of pursuing a woman nearer his own age.

I will also clutch my pearls, especially if we are talking about a marriage. My youngest little sister is very popular among boys and young men. I know a couple of men in my own age who have been hitting on her (and sometimes she has not even been aware of it, which proves to me that a child is innocent and should remain so). Luckily my youngest sister has not been interested in any man, but boys in her own age. Still, I don't mind some swearing at grown-up men who should not even look at my little sister or any other teenager. :naughty:

If they would do more than look, then I would do more than swearing. :violence-hammer:

[Lily]

You know... I actually like her, if I set aside her fundie crap. She's clearly well read, but more importantly it seems like she WANTS to do her best in her marriage and raising her children, she WANTS to make her family happy instead of just focusing on herself only. She's looking at things positively instead of griping, and taking care of her baby instead of just laying there and letting her cry.

Her house is uber-cute and not fundie-ish at all. And houses are easier to clean when they're small :)

It seems like she and her husband have things together a lot better than many adults I know in their 30's do. She's young, sure, but not that young. My husband and I have a similar age difference and I was only a year or two older than she was when we started dating. Historically, their age difference and relationship is quite normal. Maybe not in this day and age, but just because it's not common doesn't mean it's wrong. I sure as hell prefer reading about Lauren's relationship than those of the Courtney Stodden's of the world, since we all basically know that she's a live in prostitute.

[Wolfie]

sorry everyone, the whole "everyone got married young and had lots of babies a hundred years ago" is right up there as a pet peeve of mine with "women never worked before the feminist movement and the 1960s!" uh, yeah.

There are letters that exsist in my family between my great-grandma and a friend that discuss birth control. (they don't actually say it, probably to avoid the mail laws of the time, but it's obvious that it is what they are discussing) They are pre-1920. My grandfather was an only child.

And yeah- the "no women worked" thing has never made sense to me. My grandmothers both worked, both of my maternal great-grandmothers worked- one as an accountant (both for the government and for my great-grandpa's business), and the other as a partner with her husband in running a farm. Most marriage relationships in the 1700's and 1800's were somewhat business related anyway. I think it is only recently that they are not.