I agree and disagree. Motive is not dependent on age, motive is dependent on motive alone. There are plenty of predatory men and predatory women who have somewhat twisted motives, largely based on their own psychological needs stemming from childhood. This can correlate with age, but doesn't always. Sometimes the hoof sounds are horses and sometimes they're zebras. If we choose to see EVERY age gap relationship as a predator/prey set up then we're making a generalisation that both stigmatises the elder partner and suggests to the younger partner that they're an idiot. I always go back to my friend and her partner mentioned in the story. He was absolutely vilified by some people in her family, now 20 years later he's adored. She was told in no uncertain terms of his predatory ways, but the relationship was instigated by her based on their mutual love of music, his kindness and respect and their shared interests. They have lasted longer than many marriages of our other friends, most of which have fallen apart (they, like me don't believe in marriage either)

So, based on what you've said, I don't have any problems with the generalised warnings - but they're readily available already. Mistakes are there to be made and have already been highlighted. These narratives exist in film and TV, they exist in books, they exist everywhere and there can't be a young woman alive who doesn't know about the warnings readily available. The idea they haven't factored these warnings into their thinking and are therefore 'unable to recognise grooming' suggests a level of naivety that may be there in some cases but isn't there in all. Adults have agency and we shouldn't presume they don't as a starting point. I worked in social work long enough to know there are certain men who target people with learning disabilities for access to their children or financial help. THOSE men need to be spotted, warned and ideally beaten with a stick, those women need protection. Youth is not a learning disability.

The narrative here should be about spotting inherent problematic personality traits. Those aren't a function of age necessarily. So I take your general point about vulnerability but reject the generalisation being applied as a default.

I'll also expand this argument, because it becomes about subjectivity quite quickly. It becomes about enforcing an individual prejudice using a rhetorical device. As a similar example, we could take economic condition or race as an indicator of a power differential. Should we be allowed to make the case... 'I don't think white people should ever date people from other races in Western democracies...' we can argue this is because they are using social advantage to secure a mate. I suspect there are some people who would agree with this position. I don't mind people warning others about the dangers of dating outside their racial bubble if that's what they do. I wrote an article about it here. https://medium.com/lucid-nightmare/is-john-boyega-allowed-to-exclusively-fancy-and-date-black-women-c5c64faa2421

But I do have problems with bashing such relationships as standard when they exist. The reason being that a judgement is being made on a characteristic of two people that neither of them has any control over. The same applies with age. Racism and ageism. Faced with a buffet of subjectivity on what differences there are between people and how much those differences matter, I think the only reasonable response is to reserve public judgement. That's why I have my two questions and it's why I stick to them. Not my place to interfere.

Thanks for rocking into the frosty collective and disagreeing though. I am sure there are many who agree with you. Many of them in this comments section. :o)