Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25926288-20161205015930/@comment-28162607-20170103093716

Edward Zachary Sunrose wrote: Doesn't matter how old Neal was, though it's likely he was 23/24. Emma was 17, which is typically the age of consent in 90% of the country.

Also, the most "beautiful" love story of all time, Romeo and Juliet (which to me is boring as hell) has a 12 year old Juliet marrying and 19 year old Romeo, and having a pre-arranged engagement to a 21 year old.

Being raised in the Enchanted Forest, which is usually reminiscent of those real world times in which R&J is set, Neal wouldn't have cared about age differences in the slightest. And being 17, Emma would've been old enough to consent to a relationship with Neal, especially since she was a runaway and had no guardians or parents who could deny their consent.

I don't understand the hate for Neal for "taking advantage" of Emma. He was 23, he was almost as much a child as she was. If he was 30, then it would be a completely different story. Emma was actually 16. And we have no evidence to suggest that relationships between adults and children were ever common in the EF.

In what world is a 16 (who is mentally 14 due to her stunted growth, which Jen has confirmed) old enough to consent with a man in his 20s? There is a clear powere inbalance.

23 is nowhere in the realm of 16.