To think he’s too old for her

[BeGreySnake]

I have 3 children, eldest is 17 and in 6th form. She is 18 in April.
She is quite a quiet and studious girl, good group of friends, she is learning to drive and works part time. I know she has had boys who she’s liked but there’s been no boyfriends that I have known of.
About a month ago she went out to a pub and saw friends from the year above, who work together and who were out with their colleagues. One of these colleagues started chatting to my daughter and they hit it off. He is 27.
They have been somewhat inseparable ever since. I haven’t met him, but I have invited him over so hopefully I will get to soon. He has his own place so they tend to go there if they’re not out.
Its hard as she is smitten and I can’t say he has done anything wrong as such, but I just struggle with why an adult would want to date a school girl (albeit one who will be an adult in a few months). I have had the usual chats about being careful/contraception etc.

You really do need to meet this young man and see what you are dealing with.

Maybe so but not grooming as we understand it today.
All I'm saying is that 19 and 32 isn't inherently bad.

You keep telling yourself this.

How big was the large age gap between the older man YOU dated when you were in your teens?

Or are you the older man who dated a girl 15+ years younger?

.

It's not great.

You haven’t said anything to indicate that he wasn’t being predatory though. You base that on the fact you haven’t changed your outlook despite being a fully grown adult now.

I honestly feel sick when I think of the man I dated at 17, but at 17 I thought it was great. He wasn’t abusive, nothing like that, but looking back there was a reason a fully grown adult man was interested in a child who was old enough to be ‘legal’. Vile.

Yes I will because it's not really a big deal.
I've said that if she were 16 and he 30 it would be massively unacceptable - I'm not advocating large age gaps at all but 17 and 27 not an issue. Not. To. Me.
He's not some pervert.
The only thing is that she might outgrow him. I see that.

I didn't really date until I was 18 my first boyfriend was 24.
Nobody clutched their pearls over this. Not even my highly protective father.

And stop accusing everybody who disagrees with you as being a man. It's a really childish thing to do.

The ‘everyday definition‘ - WTF is that about? Is this something you have decided or have I missed something?

If she's dropped her friends and delayed a driving lesson etc, that would be a concern. The fact that they've been inseparable, at his age, is a red flag. 40 years ago we didn't need ID to get into places, or go watch films. Technically he needs your permission for her to watch a horror film, over Halloween. The fact he's jumped into it, is the ick part. They could have been chatting and then met up again, until he was closer to 18. He hasn't and isn't giving her breathing space, but of course he isn't, he's bagged a teenager. He needs to be invited round. He can't exactly take her drinking with his mates. You most definitely need to tell your younger ones to not bring up his age, or point out how old he is. Play this carefully.

It's life stages. At 27 your daughter will of been working for many years/have been in higher education holidays alone/friends have her own place maybe driving a whole world of experience. Is she going to be interested in a boy of 17 at school who has only known his parents home school friends and family holidays. What would be the interest for her? A power inbalance? Or what stopped her from maturing to want to only date people her own age like most of us want to because once you've left school yourself it's not high on the attractive desirable list to date a schoolchild.

When you flip it it becomes really difficult to understand.

Keep your daughter very close,meet this man as many times as you can to suss him out. It may well be that it fizzles out and she outgrows him.

It's in the dictionaries. Child does not always mean under 18 years old.

A young woman of 27 is not a child in most people's eyes.

This is not really relevant given that 27-year-old women are not generally attracted to 17-year-old boys.
So given the obvious differences between the two sexes it's not really going to work to flip it around.

I don't know why it's so hard for some to accept that young women prefer older men and as long as the age gap isn't too great like she's 16 and he's 30, which would be totally unacceptable it's OK.

He's not inherently weird at all. She may outgrow him, though.

The only thing I don't get about this is that if she is only 17, why wasn't she challenged at the bar? Don't they have a challenge 25 nonsense policy in every pub now?

Let's be honest she was likely to have been drinking alcohol with her year older friends.

I agree. Mumsnet always clutches its pearls but there are plenty of young women who know exactly what they are doing when they date more sexually experienced men with money and a grown up brain.

A 17 year old girl should be concentrating on their studies not distracting themselves with boys/men who are largely just interested in sex.

I agree.
The pearls are clutched because to admit this would to admit inherent differences in the two sexes i. e. young women prefer older-not old! - men and not usually the other way around.

It is an affront to the modern day belief that sex differences don't exist.

At the end of the day, I suppose we've all got our own ideas about what's too old and what isn't.
For me, the gap here is not too much.

16 and 30 would be too much.

She said the vast majority would be working, not all.

Sometimes I think that the people commenting on the 70s/80s/90s have no idea of how things were like at the time.

(The 40 years ago comment from another poster was funny. The one about it only being socially acceptable to date someone the same age or some such -tell me you didn't live the through the 80s without telling me you didn't live through the 80s.)

Sure it may have been expected for certain girls to go to university but across the population as a whole they most certainly did not.

Please, a 17.5 year old is not a child!

I left school in 86 and nearly everybody-the boys and girls, in my year groupnwentbon to bigher education.

@Gotthepills Nope. In 1970 only 8% of people aged between 18-21 went to university.

The vast majority did not.

Almost 60 years married, I think it's safe to say they've made it work... 🤷‍♀️

Around 15% did A levels in the 1970s. Mostly from a very select social group.

Pubs must be chocker with 17-year olds, I’d have thought!
(Especially girls, many of whom would give a jaded Vegas hostess a run for her money in terms of perceived age.)
But what’s that about people in pubs all being peers?
Just picture a table with guys in their late twenties, pissed and ogling a table of underage teenaged girls, deep into the Babychams or whatever they drink these days. Are these all peers? (Actual question, not rhetorical)