Hell hath no fury. Or nice work if you can get it.

21 year old.. 9 years his junior? High five!

I heard a rumour that Peter Ashton left his ex because of her question mark phobia.

chewy14 said :

KB1971 said :

People are funny with age gaps. My wife and I have been together for 14 years, I was 25 & she was 17 when we got together. I had a pretty good group of friends, some of whom were also neighbours that knew us both well (she was the girl next door) who dropped me around the same time.

No one has really said anything but the way it all happened was too coincidental.

The thing is, for all of their judgement, we have made a great life together, have 3 kids & are very happy. People can be odd sometimes.

By any chance, did you used to play AFL for St Kilda?

Nope, why?

Skidbladnir said :

Wait a second, you’re agreed that gays deserve the same rights as people who spawn without a piece of paper, further, that they should be able to adopt? If you’re already saying de factos, civil unions, and marriages are equivalent in all ways except name, then you’d support the sharing of that name. Less is hypocrisy.

Also, subsidies for married & de-facto people is mostly to encourage staying together and further building wealth, but also to incentivise having a _clean paper record of union_…
Dissolution of de-facto and unmarried childed couples penalises individuals through the costs and hasle of seperation of assets, and puts an undeserved portion of it back in the hands of lawyers. 🙁

I didn’t say that they are all equivalent, but nor did I say that they aren’t. My point is about those whose living arrangements shouldn’t be subsidised by the state, and those whose possibly should. The absence or presence of children being the determining factor.

alaninoz said :

Give them the benefits if they%u2019ve got kids, If not, not. The fact that you%u2019re married/de facto/civil partnership/whatever is no reason for the taxpayers to subsidise you. Supporting future citizens might be.

Wait a second, you’re agreed that gays deserve the same rights as people who spawn without a piece of paper, further, that they should be able to adopt? If you’re already saying de factos, civil unions, and marriages are equivalent in all ways except name, then you’d support the sharing of that name. Less is hypocrisy.

Also, subsidies for married & de-facto people is mostly to encourage staying together and further building wealth, but also to incentivise having a _clean paper record of union_…
Dissolution of de-facto and unmarried childed couples penalises individuals through the costs and hasle of seperation of assets, and puts an undeserved portion of it back in the hands of lawyers. 🙁

georgesgenitals said :

alaninoz said :

Break the nexus between benefits and marriage and put it where it belongs.

Haven’t we already done that? De facto and gay partnerships get the same legal rights as marriage anyway, I think.

Maybe so, but misses the point. Give them the benefits if they’ve got kids, If not, not. The fact that you’re married/de facto/civil partnership/whatever is no reason for the taxpayers to subsidise you. Supporting future citizens might be.

alaninoz said :

Break the nexus between benefits and marriage and put it where it belongs.

Haven’t we already done that? De facto and gay partnerships get the same legal rights as marriage anyway, I think.

KB1971 said :

People are funny with age gaps. My wife and I have been together for 14 years, I was 25 & she was 17 when we got together. I had a pretty good group of friends, some of whom were also neighbours that knew us both well (she was the girl next door) who dropped me around the same time.

No one has really said anything but the way it all happened was too coincidental.

The thing is, for all of their judgement, we have made a great life together, have 3 kids & are very happy. People can be odd sometimes.

By any chance, did you used to play AFL for St Kilda?

People are funny with age gaps. My wife and I have been together for 14 years, I was 25 & she was 17 when we got together. I had a pretty good group of friends, some of whom were also neighbours that knew us both well (she was the girl next door) who dropped me around the same time.

No one has really said anything but the way it all happened was too coincidental.

The thing is, for all of their judgement, we have made a great life together, have 3 kids & are very happy. People can be odd sometimes.

I see nothing wrong with the age difference, it would be different if she was a teenager, and he was 30.
I always preferred older men then myself, when I was younger, (not too old), but these days I seem to attract younger men, it’s great.

Mr Gillespie said :

A bit of an age difference there. Typical cradle-snatching 30-year-old guy.

Yep, we’re buggers like that, better lift your game and compete mr g.