Yeah -- I'm 44, I'm a grown-ass feminist, I've been the "Mom Friend" (literally and figuratively, I had my daughter at 16) to friends of varying ages (many of them older than me!), when some "maternal-type" nurturing, caring, concern, or ass-kicking was called for . . . but I never made the mistake of denying anyone their own agency.
There's a difference between saying "I'm concerned that some of these aren't healthy choices, or that this person may be taking advantage of/grooming you," and making a flat statement that a non-minor friend is incapable of consenting to sex, at all, period.
ESPECIALLY when disability is on the table, because so many people are deeply squicked by disabled ppl having sex drives and sex lives. Don't infantilize people who are neurodivergent, mentally ill, or physically disabled.
None of the behavior described is "maternal" -- it's unhealthy, controlling, and . . . I can't quite come up with the right phrase, but it's predatory in the name of ideology, to try to disenfranchise the LW from expressing or being comfortable with their own sexuality.
no subject
There's a difference between saying "I'm concerned that some of these aren't healthy choices, or that this person may be taking advantage of/grooming you," and making a flat statement that a non-minor friend is incapable of consenting to sex, at all, period.
ESPECIALLY when disability is on the table, because so many people are deeply squicked by disabled ppl having sex drives and sex lives. Don't infantilize people who are neurodivergent, mentally ill, or physically disabled.
None of the behavior described is "maternal" -- it's unhealthy, controlling, and . . . I can't quite come up with the right phrase, but it's predatory in the name of ideology, to try to disenfranchise the LW from expressing or being comfortable with their own sexuality.