Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that 14 year olds in a relationship should not be classed as 'couples'.

183 replies

Elendon · 19/10/2016 17:08

It just beggars belief that this should be the case. They are not in a relationship, nor are they couples. Nor should they be seen as being so. How can two 14/15 year old children be seen as being in adult enough to do the things 'couples' do?

OP posts:
OnionKnight · 20/10/2016 11:15

You're really not making any sense OP.

As for not alluding to anybody in particular, it's right there in your posts from page one.

kali110 · 20/10/2016 11:16

So you know people who after 30 years who called it a day? That's it?
I know two couples who have been together since school and are in their 50's and are still together.
Different people!
I also wouldn't say to soneone if they were with someone dating a guy for a month that they weren't a couple. Hmm

Mozfan1 · 20/10/2016 11:18

I wasn't with my dh when I was 15, I just said I had a relationship when I was 15. So because dh and I aren't middle aged we ... What? Aren't a proper couple? I'm confused. You never answered my question about why it matters why people 'haven't reached middle age' yet

noeffingidea · 20/10/2016 11:21

Sorry, I haven't read the whole thread.
I don't have any problem with the word 'couple' being used. To me it's just shorthand for boyfriend/girlfriend or husband/wife. I'm also not shocked or surprised by 14 year olds having sex.
I do object to them being described as 'bonnie and clyde' because that romanticises them, which is the last thing we should do where sociopathic teenagers are concerned.

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 11:26

The term Bonnie and Clyde was used by the prosecution witness, a psychiatrist. I doubt he meant it to be seen as romanticising the relationship.

And that is the last time I talk about this.

This is a thread about what the title and my op suggests. Can we please keep on topic.

OP posts:
ShowMeTheElf · 20/10/2016 11:32

I think that youngish teens can be a couple.
I think that the comments on the relationships board to which you refer are whether or not one is considered 'a partner' after dating for a couple of months and not living together.

Bruce02 · 20/10/2016 12:26

As I have said before in this thread, why is it when on the relationships board, if an adult posts that they are a couple after a month of going out, people will come back, almost all, and say this isn't a relationship, you are not a couple

No one here can answer as to why another adult holds this view. The only time I have seen similar on relationships is when people call their boyfriend 'my partner' when they see then once a week for about a month. I have never seen anyone question the term 'couple'. Perhaps you should ask those people on those threads.

The fact that some people may think being a couple excludes age, how much time you spend together etc does not translate into 'you have to be over 18 to be a couple'.

The only one confusing the thread is you, op. Most people have no clue why you are bringing Bonnie and Clyde into it. Who were a couple who committed crime together.

As I said, the term 'couple' is not age dependent. Nor is it a term that only used in only certain types of relationships.

milkyface · 20/10/2016 13:50

I think if you and the person you're in a relationship see yourself as a couple, you're a couple. It's not for anyone else to speculate, not parents, not friends or acquaintances, nobody else.

You can't out an age limit, time limit, any other limit on it.

You've said you don't think teenagers can be couples, lots of others have said they can, you've disagreed, and repeat.

You don't even say why it's a bad thing to refer to them as couples you don't give reason why people shouldn't you're just arguing the toss over something irrelevant!

Callipygian · 20/10/2016 14:22

I am now married to my boyfriend that I started dating when I was 13 - We have 2 kids and are very happy :)

MuseumOfCurry · 20/10/2016 14:30

I'm really missing the point here, is there some case that's been in the news about this?

I have a 14 year old and I cannot imagine conferring status on any romantic relationship he might enter into at this point. He doesn't even have interest in girls yet.

LikeDylanInTheMovies · 20/10/2016 14:39

The only time I have seen similar on relationships is when people call their boyfriend 'my partner' when they see then once a week for about a month.

Yes. I find that very irritating and misleading. 'My partner won't commit to buying a flat with me' and the 'partner' has only been on the scene for six weeks in a fairly casual way, puts a different complexion to someone who has lived with the person for 20 years and they have children together.

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 14:44

Museum

There is another thread I posted on. And others have followed me to this thread, which is entirely different (and they know it) from that thread. They have brought thoughts from that and posted on here. I have responded.

I just wanted to know if you would class 14 year olds as a couple. I think this is odd and that is my view point. Others think it's perfectly fine.

I have a fifteen year old who is changing into a man, but in no way wants a relationship. He does have interest in girls though.

OP posts:
milkyface · 20/10/2016 14:46

What a 15 year old tells you and what they really want are probably two different things

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 14:50

I didn't say it was a 'bad thing' though. Couples, partners what is the difference?

OP posts:
Quietwhenreading · 20/10/2016 14:51

Ok OP so your 15 yo doesn't want a relationship. That's fine.

That doesn't mean that other 15 yo might not develop relationships.

I didn't go out with my now DH at 15 expecting or desiring a relationship he was just the funny boy from maths class who asked me out.

But we fell in love. Incontrovertibly in love. The real thing. Not a teenage crush.

We're in our 40s and have been together nearly 30 years. We are still
Each other's best friends. We have a strong, happy marriage full our laughter and affection.

Perhaps not all teenage romances can or should be called a relationship- but that doesn't mean it never happens.

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 14:51

Milky this is my third teenager, I think I know the difference!

OP posts:
Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 14:54

But most teenage relationships don't! That is the point. The majority of teenage relationships do not go on to have fulfilling lives together. You are the exception.

OP posts:
Mozfan1 · 20/10/2016 14:55

Elendon you don't get to decide what other people, whether they be teenagers or otherwise, call their relationships. Get over it.

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 14:55

Plus I think there is a world of difference between 13 and 15.

OP posts:
AllwaysCarryMashems · 20/10/2016 14:56

People use the term couple to mean different things. You appear to be irritated that the psychiatric witness was using terms that imply these teenagers were older or more mature than their ages would suggest? If that's the point I'd agree, referring to bonny & clyde influences the jury to view them a certain (&adult) way so that's wrong when they could use the professional terms.

But that doesn't mean 'couple' is used to only mean permenant relationships, people will use it differently & of course it means two.

Whoever said their friend was havig sexual relationships at age 12- legally a 12 yr old can't consent, so that would be rape not sex. & while the law of consent is used carefully (because there's no magic switched that suddenly changes ability to consent on 16th birthday) in England and Wales & Scotland anyone having sex with a 12 is automaticly prosecuTed & face being on the sex offenders register. So please don't claim your friend was in 'sexual relationships' when she was being molested- isn't this what the op is objecting to in the first place, using adult terminology to imply children are more capable of being responsible than our laws say they are, which would then influence the jury et al.

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 14:58

Get over what?

Would you think that a 12 year old should not have a boyfriend? Because my eldest did at that age, with someone who was slightly older than her. Did it last? No. Was it intense? Yes. Were they a couple? No.

OP posts:
Mozfan1 · 20/10/2016 15:01

What is your point? If two people think they are a couple, they are. Regardless of what you or anyone else thinks.

Quietwhenreading · 20/10/2016 15:03

Yes but *Elendon your point was apparently that it was ridiculous that teenagers could ever be considered to be in a relationship.

I disagree, sometimes they are.

I had friends who started going out at 15 and split up during university at 20yo. They ended up married to other people but that doesn't mean that what they had for 5 years wasn't a relationship.

Original poster
Elendon · 20/10/2016 15:05

My point is that teenagers have relationships but this should not be classed as being a couple.

OK?

OP posts:
Bruce02 · 20/10/2016 15:05

For me a couple is anyone dating or doing something in a group of two. So dd is having a couple of friends over. That's 2 friends coming over. No romance involved.

A couple could be someone casually dating, serious relationship, married etc.

A partner (as opposed)to a boyfriend/ girlfriend is someone you are in a serious longterm relationship with.

There is no difference between partner and couple because they are two different things. You can be a couple in any stage of the relationship.

You could call the other person your boyfriend or partner and would still be a couple.