Cradlesnatching

[toni*]

my great aunt has been married 3 times (in fact both my great aunts have) i recently found out her husband is not yet 56 and she is 70, this came as a surprise to me as i thought he was around the same age maybe 2-4 years younger but not that much, however i shouldnt really be surprised as my Grandad was 12 years older than my Nan and my father 12 years older than my mother
maybe though it wouldnt be acceptable nowdays that ages when they first 'got together'
also my great grandad was 17 years older than my great gran.

[LizzieW]

My g.grandparents don't appear to have married, but must have been together from 1883, my gran being born in April 1884  

If they had married in 1883, my g.gran would have been 40 and my g.grandfather about 25.  That is outside toni's formula, to fit the formula he should have been at least 27. Mind you according to the 1891 census, g.gran was only 42 ageing only 2 years in 8!! (I have her birth certificate to prove that wrong).

Lizzie

[toni*]

its Nudges formula not mine but my great grandparents were also outside the formula with him being born in 1850 and her in 1867 and they marrying in 1892 she should have been at least 28 she was 25

[LizzieW]

its Nudges formula not mine

Apologies to you and Nudge.

Lizzie

[Redroger]

In my tree, age disparities seem to be the norm rather than the exception.

[nudge67]

Well, not my formula either, but that of the researchers. It was based on extensive surveys in several western countries on the question of acceptable age difference. Remarkably, there was little national or regional variation, the formula held true averywhere.

[Redroger]

On a slightly different though related tack concerning the Northern Ireland first minister whose wife also an MP aged 60 has had an affair with a 20 year old toy boy. If they married what would the ratio be?