• Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    121
    ·
    11 months ago

    Read the text 3 times before spotted the 36 on the pic. Where is the useless red circle when you have a brain fart?

    • cryshlee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is the second time this week I’ve ever heard this phrase in my entire life. I feel like I know what it means but I’m afraid to ask

      • Cabrio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s a horse riding addage, a horse ridden hard gets dirty and messy, put away wet means it doesn’t get cleaned. Basically a dirty worn old looking horse.

  • CIWS-30@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Good advice from 1901. Especially the bit about not marrying women older, taller, or wealthier than you. Especially all 3. Even if she’s like 1 day older, 1 inch taller, or $1 wealthier than you. You gotta man up and not tie that knot!

    /S

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    These were originally labeled “56” and “17” because a Libertarian made the image.

  • Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    If both parties are 18 and above, it is none of our business. Many men are into cougars and many women like sugar daddies. Whatever floats their boat.

    • Noughmad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Legally, yes. You can’t and shouldn’t prevent them from dating.

      But, it’s still creepy, it’s usually still predatory, and there can be a huge power imbalance. Basically, the main thing is whether either person can easily leave at any time - often the younger one can’t.

      • LonelyWendigo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t know man. If at 50 I ran into a 20 something that was into dating me, I’d feel more like prey than a predator. But, who am I kidding? If the roles were reversed and I was a 20 something encountering a 50+ cougar, I’d still feel like prey. It’s definitely all about power dynamics, but I don’t think making assumptions about adult people’s situations based on age alone is appropriate or helpful.

      • corm@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        How is that any different than 18 year olds getting an apartment together and being too broke to easily move out if needed? And there are plenty of older people in the same boat financially. In fact most people live paycheck to paycheck.

        I guess what you really mean is that poor people should only date other poor people, to make it a fair power balance. /s

  • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    And if you’re 18, you can only date someone who is exactly 18. Can’t go any lower or any higher.

    Idk who told this to me, but what a weird contradiction. I guess it sorta makes sense.

    • Iron Lynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Nope. If your age minimum for a partner y is determined by your age x with the function:

      y = 1/2 x + 7

      then the point where y = x is at y - 7 = 1/2 x. Setting y to x leads us to x - 7 = x / 2, which happens at x = 14.

      At x = 18, y = 18/2 + 7 = 9 + 7 = 16.

      Relatedly, if we invert the function, y - 7 = 1/2 x, thus 2y - 14 = x, which gives us the theoretical maximum for a possible partner. If a possible partner is older than that, you’d be understood to call them a cougar, or whatever the male equivalent is.

      • JakenVeina@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The opposite of age/2+7 is (age-7)*2, not age*2-7. I.E. the min age for a 29-year-old would be 21, not 18, and the age whose min is 18, I.E. the max for an 18-year-old, would be 22.

      • Laticauda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        That max age formula is pointless and contradicts the minimum age formula. For 29 the min age based on the min age equation is 21.5 which I’d say can be rounded up to 22, which sounds more reasonable than a 29 year old dating an 18 year old, which isn’t illegal sure, but I’m sure plenty of people would be raising an eyebrow at it.

        That max age equation would mean that a max age for 14 would be 21. In contrast the min age for a 21 year old is 17.5, which can be rounded up to 18. Yymv on that one in particular, but I’m sure we can all agree that a 21 year old dating an 18 year old is a lot less sus than them dating a 14 year old. The minimum age formula seems fine enough on its own, not necessarily a universal rule but enough of a guideline to go by generally. If you want to calculate based on the younger age, just re-arrange the formula. With the older age being AgeO and the younger age being ageY, you go from ageY = (AgeO/2) + 7 to AgeO = (ageY - 7)*2.

      • Laticauda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The max age formula is pointless and contradicts the minimum age formula. For 29 the min age based on the min age equation is 21.5 which I’d say can be rounded up to 22, which sounds more reasonable than a 29 year old dating an 18 year old, which isn’t illegal sure, but I’m sure plenty of people would be raising an eyebrow at it.

        That max age equation would mean that a max age for 14 would be 21. In contrast the min age for a 21 year old is 17.5, which can be rounded up to 18. Yymv on that one in particular, but I’m sure we can all agree that a 21 year old dating an 18 year old is a lot less sus than them dating a 14 year old. The minimum age formula seems fine enough on its own, not necessarily a universal rule but enough of a guideline to go by.

  • thanevim@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    With how stressful things have been lately? I might just look like that in just under a decade…

    • theodewere@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      maybe 1987 was a weak batch or something, and they’re aging prematurely… i don’t have any data to support that…

      • Yendor@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        They started high-school just after Columbine, they were trying to get through high-school when 9/11 happened, they were trying to start their careers when the GFC came along, and they were trying to get married when COVID hit. Late-80s babies can’t catch a break.

        • theodewere@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          no i agree 100%, i feel for them… i honestly can’t tell you how sick i am about it… Columbine was enough…

      • Cabrio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        You might be onto something, I’m from around that time period, balding at 20, grey hairs in my beard for the last 3 years…

        • theodewere@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          we may have accidentally released some weird chemicals or something that year… that was when all the Star Wars SDI stuff was happening, it’s hard to say what we were up to… i’m sorry dude… blame Reagan…

    • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Holy shit, I had to fact check this. I guess being an evil fuck ages the body. Wow.

  • LakesLem@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    41 dating 25, we’re both happy but guess I should hand myself in somewhere ;~;

    But yeah definitely looking younger than 36 based on these standards 😅

  • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    You’re right ! He still has all his heart on top of his head.

    Who is out there seeing impossible standard for men ?