If she is 20 years younger, then he will have to date her until she is 18 or so, but that's okay, too. Mother nature and the lawyers agree: A women of 18 is old enough to get married, have kids, and do well at both.
Plato and many American states agree: A women of 16 is old enough to get married, have kids
Plato would even add the "and do well at both".
That is advice from a famous philosopher. He thought 16 was ideal for women, and 30 was ideal for men. I have no idea if he might have had a personal bias in that matter.
While I place no trust in Plato's reasoning or evidence, I don't see the issue as "moral". Instead, I see the importance of good family formation, which the US is failing at (birth rate so low we are rapidly going extinct, literally -- the most basic failing of a society), and needing solutions good in all or nearly all respects.
Failing at family formation is no darned good and worse -- it canNOT last. On this point f'get about Plato, Fromm, or me and, instead, listen to Darwin -- yup, he's on the case.
The combination of getting romantic advice from movies and the statutory rape vibes of this comment would lead me to suggest not following this advice, OP.
I didn't, and wouldn't, suggest getting "romantic advice" from movies: But it happens that some movies DO a good job illustrating some common, strong aspects of female emotions. That's not "advice" but just data from some samples. Partly the examples are in the movies BECAUSE much of the audience can or already does understand them -- so, indirectly what's in the movies is some of what is already commonly well understood in the audience. Besides, I explained that should take what was in common for the dozen or so women in those movies.
> "statutory rape"
Nonsense. 100% total nonsense. No where did I suggest or imply that they have sexual intercourse before she is 18 and married. And I would suggest that they not. If they don't have sexual intercourse, then there is no "rape".
You are profoundly confused.
You are also bitterly angry at me for NOTHING. I wrote calmly, rationally, clearly.
The Art of Loving was positively one of the worst books I have ever read. He was an unmarried, childless Atheist that wrote a book about love. As a religious, married man with children, his ideas on loving God, a spouse, and your children are almost completely wrong. It was like reading Ayn Rand, "true statement, true statement, true statement, completely illogical and nonsensical conclusion, unsupported by prior statements".
I'm not arguing against you at all in regards to your conclusion about the book (I haven't read it, and the previous poster has me concerned), but I'm a bit confused about the atheist bit here - do you take exception to their understanding of love, or just loving god?
the start is a person who feels anxiety from their realization that alone they are vulnerable to the hostile forces of nature and society. "Alone" is essentially as in this thread. Then how to respond? From Fromm, love of god is one possible response -- some people suppress a lot anxiety that way and, maybe, have some forms of bonding that can help them in practical ways. Another response is love of spouse -- that's what's central in this thread. A third response is to join a group, that might tribal in some sense, political, religious, etc. -- but being in the group can help do something, hopefully productive, about the aloneness, vulnerability, and anxiety.
A biggie point is Fromm's explanation of love of spouse as a response to the anxiety and not much like the pop culture version of love. To be blunt, porn is Fromm's (iv) and misses all of the benefits of his (i) to (iii). What they do in the porn shots is useless -- the actors don't even pay attention to each other, no kissing, bonding. It does nothing good and, of course, can do harm.
Fromm's book is short. Get some views of some of the clinical psychology or marriage counseling communities. Then, since the book is so short, just read the thing.
I'm just passing along what I learned paying full tuition, trying desperately to save the life of my wife, which I failed to do. Don't take my advice -- ask others as I suggested. Then, did I mention, the book is short? Again, did I mention that won't find Fromm's ideas in pop culture.
It's obvious where Fromm got his information and ideas about women, love, etc. -- from the history of counseling women, some very unhappy, in Vienna, going back to Freud.
Experience with just one marriage would not be nearly such good information or yield such good ideas.
