i just want a solution to the rejection.

This conversation...sorry, it doesn't seem to be going well. We are bucking the core programming of the game by setting up the potential for teen-older romance here, and it's not always going to work smoothly right away. Sometimes the game will fight back, in some circumstances. I am trying to get more information and offer suggestions here, that's the best I can do.

I'll try once more and then stop, perhaps someone else here can take over.
--What kind of attraction scores are you getting between the two sims on Scan Room, and are they over 100?
--Do you have the Woohooer Scoring add-on module in place and do you have Trait Scoring set to True?

Maybe our developer or one of the others can provide a different way to cut through the barrier that always works for them without the scoring and learning traits first requirements.

photo : https://image.ibb.co/b2QcGo/2346261342.png

Woohooer is a base mod. It has add-on modules. They are separate files just like MC Cheats and SP Career are. One of them is called Woohooer Scoring. This one.
<a href="http://nraas.wikispaces.com/Woohooer%20 ... hirteen</a>

Do you have it in play alongside of the Woohooer base mod, because I don't see over half of the options I would expect to see on that menu in the screenshot.

okey now which settings ? https://image.ibb.co/jfnGbo/2346261342.png

Trait Scoring for User Directed > True

The others look like as I would expect them now. (I think)

But try it either way.

rating 0 does not rise and i am constantly rejected https://image.ibb.co/ckPwbo/342253.png

constantly rejected excluding . everything works fine.

Then I would have to say that, for whatever reason, the game is not seeing these two sims as even potentially attracted to each other right now. Are they blood related in addition to having the age difference?

I don't know of way to force Woohooer for two sims whom it deems to not have potential attraction to allow successful Romantic interactions, even the light ones.

Asking our developer @Chain, what are we missing here?