In the mood for a creepy photo?

[tabitha2]

Go to Patsey Chambliss Coghlans, the MIL of Kim Coghlan, FB page and look at her cover photo.That was her and her new husband 41 one years ago in 1971.Her husband was born in 73.Nothing much gets to me any more but I hope she just looked that young.

[Grace]

What year was the husband born?

I think they both look young in the picture but she looks like she looks younger than she is to me. They look about the same age in recent pictures.

[Grace]

Wow, the Google Machine is really working it's stuff form me today. Is this them?

http://www.texasmarriagerecords.org/mar ... bliss.html

At the time, Douglas was seventeen years old and Earlene was twenty-one. If they're both still alive, Douglas is now fifty-eight and Earlene is sixty-two. And if they're still together, they will have been happily married for forty-one years.

ETA: But my brain apparently ISN'T working--the quote isn't even the same names! Wow. Need more coffee. Try THIS instead.

Marriage Date 01/14/1971

Husband Perry C Coghlan II

Husband Born 1954/1953

Wife Patsy R Chambliss

Wife Born 1950/1949

So she was 20 or 21 and he was 17 or 18 if that is correct!

[tabitha2]

No.His parents are Perry the II and Patsey Chambliss Coghlan.

[tabitha2]

She can't be 21 in that picture and that's no 17 year old I don't think! But the names are right-weird.

[Grace]

She can't be 21 in that picture and that's no 17 year old I don't think! But the names are right-weird.

Maybe their birthdates are swapped? I could see him being 21 and her being 17. That wouldn't have been SUPER unusual in 1971. Heck my sister was 18 and her husband 20 or 21 when they got married in the 90's.

[Didi]

i cannot find a fb under that name, so i cannot see the pic :-p

Is this them though in 1975? Or is this not them? :)

grandmafromafar.blogspot.com/2009/06/our-family-in-1975.html

[tabitha2]

http://www.facebook.com/patsy.coghlan

[VintageJen1984]

She can't be 21 in that picture and that's no 17 year old I don't think! But the names are right-weird.

I don't think he looks terribly off for 17, lots of men get the strong masculine older facial features quite early. And as I'm 27 and usually judged for 19-21 I obviously have no problem believing she's 21 in that picture.

[ladypuglover]

:shock: I was thinking she looked 12 in the photo at most.

I had a classmate who at 18 looked like she was 10 years old at most. At our reunion she looked to be a good 15-16 instead of 28. Some people just age really, really well. :?