Ask McFartnuggets: “If 60 Is The New 50, Shouldn’t The New Age of Consent Be 28?”

Dear McFartnuggets: 
I’m always hearing people say shit like “60 is the new 50” and “50 is the new 40” and “40 is the new 30” and “30 is the new 20” so this means people are ten years younger than they actually are. If that’s true then shouldn’t the legal age of sexual consent in America be 28-years-old instead of 18? Because that would mean an 18-year-old is actually 8-years-old, or at least that’s how they feel based on this pattern that society is establishing. -- Marcus from Staten Island, New York

Dear Marcus:
No, the age of consent shouldn’t be 28-years-old because all these people saying 60 is the new 50 and 50 is the new 40 and 40 is the new 30 and 30 is the new 20 are full of crap. Maybe only one of those is true, but they can’t all be. We’re not all ten years younger than our actual age. Maybe 60 is the new 50 but that’s where it stops. You can’t just keep going down the line because then you get into confusing situations like the one you just posed. For example: a 10-year-old is still a living being and is not 0. When you give birth to a baby it’s not negative 10 years old.

120 is the new 80.

E-mail your questions to PizzaTesticles@yahoo.com

No comments :

Post a Comment