Something unrelated
I love all of the Fillipino butthurt because their fighter got beat by an Aussie
poor bb y r u madAurani wrote:
Get out of my ITT you shitposting twats
I'm sure your precious Madvillain would not appreciate it.Hika wrote:
poor bb y r u mad
let me rub ur butt
yeah but this doesn't even mention older women having higher chances of birth defects either, which is what you claimed. in fact, at one point this study suggested that teenagers have a harder time giving birth due to lower weight and undeveloped body. here, have a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_and_female_fertilityB1rd wrote:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2431924
"There is no evidence of an overall increase in congenital malformations among babies born to teenagers."
So yes it is normal for men, even older men, to be attracted to 15 or 16 year old girls who've gone through puberty.which is not true at all. some girls don't even start their periods at that age. you've gone through your puberty once you hit your early 20s, but at that age they're actually at their peak of puberty.
And yet that claim isn't even backed up by any sources in wikipedia, so it's null and void.Foxtrot wrote:
yeah but this doesn't even mention older women having higher chances of birth defects either, which is what you claimed. in fact, at one point this study suggested that teenagers have a harder time giving birth due to lower weight and undeveloped body. here, have a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_and_female_fertility
"After puberty, female fertility increases and then decreases, with advanced maternal age causing an increased risk of female infertility."
it also mentions that fertility is at its peak during a woman's 20s because that's when their puberty ends. at one point you said thatSo yes it is normal for men, even older men, to be attracted to 15 or 16 year old girls who've gone through puberty.which is not true at all. some girls don't even start their periods at that age. you've gone through your puberty once you hit your early 20s, but at that age they're actually at their peak of puberty.
B1rd wrote:
It doesn't matter if teenagers haven't finished puberty yet, they have most of their secondary sex characteristics, and are reproductively viable, and these are the things that are important for attractiveness.
imagine actually using this as a defense IRLB1rd wrote:
Do you make it a point to be antagonistic about everything? Go vent your self-righteous moral outrage somewhere else.
But it isn't particularly important that teenagers are more fertile than women in their 20s, because it is sufficient to back up my point that they are simply capable of reproductionthanks for stating the obvious. and also you seemed pretty fixated on fertility so that's why i pointed it out. oh, and by that logic, you'd probably think it's okay for men to go as low as 12 as long as they're capable of reproduction because it seems like nowadays the average age for first period is 12
The point is, there is nothing abnormal for men to merely be attracted to girls 15+.15 year old girls have such baby faces. they all look like kids. i would be really concerned if someone who's 25 was attracted to such.
[And yet that claim isn't even backed up by any sources in wikipedia, so it's null and void.do you really need a source on biological clock lol c'mon
The point isn't that they're merely capable of reproducing, but rather they are capable or near as capable as a woman in her early twenties. I'm not really interested unless you want to try and disprove the point I made that there aren't any biological - rather than sociological - reasons as to why it is abnormal for men to be attracted to teens who're well-capable of reproducing. But apparently neither you nor anyone else can separate science from issues of morality and ethics, and you go on to make ridiculous strawmans, like that I think it's okay to have sex with 12 year olds.Foxtrot wrote:
thanks for stating the obvious. and also you seemed pretty fixated on fertility so that's why i pointed it out. oh, and by that logic, you'd probably think it's okay for men to go as low as 12 as long as they're capable of reproduction because it seems like nowadays the average age for first period is 12
http://www.obgyn.net/sexual-health/firs ... ical-signs
and you know, that's kind of awfulThe point is, there is nothing abnormal for men to merely be attracted to girls 15+.15 year old girls have such baby faces. they all look like kids. i would be really concerned if someone who's 25 was attracted to such.And yet that claim isn't even backed up by any sources in wikipedia, so it's null and void.do you really need a source on biological clock lol c'mon
This, absolutely. Young girls tend to be seen as attractive by other kids, or shut-ins who haven't had much contact with the opposite sexAurani wrote:
I'm willing to bet my ass that you're younger than 20 so you claim that. Of course a 15yo will be attractive to someone barely out of puberty.
Nice graph.Milkshake wrote:
johnmedina999 wrote:
Nice sig Maho
Many people feel that incest is immoral even without pregnancy being involved, i.e. using protection or same-sex relationships. They can't usually argue why such a thing would be immoral, though.B1rd wrote:
The problem with incest is it produces babies with birth defects. But there is nothing immoral about having an incestuous relationship if the couple doesn't have a baby, even if it may be a bit creepy.