These are facts:

These are facts:
Women are more fertile during the 15-25 year range.
Males feel more attracted to the 15-25 year range, independely of their age.
A 30 year old women has a 70% risk of being infertile.

How long until feminism is crushed by hard biology facts?

Other urls found in this thread:

natureworldnews.com/articles/4462/20131016/delaying-pregnancy-cause-infertility-miscarriages-obstetricians.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe
cinemablend.com/celebrity/Top-10-Porn-Searches-2015-According-Pornhub-109827.html?story_page=9
autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/large-study-parent-age-autism-finds-increased-risk-teen-moms
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_and_female_fertility
livescience.com/14995-blood-type-linked-earlier-decline-fertility.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>A 30 year old women has a 70% risk of being infertile.

lol?

natureworldnews.com/articles/4462/20131016/delaying-pregnancy-cause-infertility-miscarriages-obstetricians.htm

says nothing about 70% and My personal view,

"as someone who's been a consultant obstetrician for 20 years, is that people should try to start having their family by 37 because after that things become more complex and it's harder to get pregnant"

I don't remember where I get the data, but it was funny to see it.

women need to take fertility treatments after 30.

>women need to take fertility treatments after 30.
Completely untrue. They might be more likely to need treatment than younger but not even close to the majority do

How is any of that related to feminism? In my country the age of consent is 14, if that's what you are talking about.

i agree with you and im the OP.

women keep posponing their pregnancy because of feminist ideas about getting a job first then later a family.

If feminism could be 'crushed' by facts, it would have been already.

But is that a feminist idea? The idea that you don't necessarily have to procreate isn't inherently feminist. It's systemic, of course, but it's not necessarily a facet of feminism.

I'm not going to tie myself down with a kid until I see the world more, and learn as much as I can in the most productive years.

It could just be that the modern advent of the phenomenon you're talking about is because there is so much more available in the world to learn, and to explore, that it's seen as foolish to give up on these opportunities during your most efficient years.

Here in Western Europe, age of consent is between 14 - 16 yrs. AND we spend millions each year to fight teenage pregnancies.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe

you need to realize one thing is those dreams, another the biological reality.

women physically peak at 23-25, then start degrading physically.

A 30 year old female is basically old.

That is not a feminist idea, silly. I mean, it is not related to gender equality, its more like life planning

> OP gives bullshit statistic

>user calls shenanigans

> OP gives bullshit source

> user proves shenanigans

> OP still talks as if statistic is true

Go to bed, Donald.

Physically yes, but no buzzwords like 'biological reality' can change that even though they're on the decline from 25-30, they still are going to be more efficient at learning new things, will still have the physical ability to experience more things, and can overall still have more fulfilling a life than 30+.

You could say it's a result of human greed, for not wanting to sacrifice yourself for a greater fertility rate, or for a greater chance of a healthy child, but that's a matter in and of itself, separate from feminism.

Not him but if I was a young adult woman in 2016 I fucking postpone that shit until at least 35.

Not because of feminism but because of the fact I wouldn't be limited to a potential mate in just only my own country.

As of now if you're competent enough to get a good paying career while young you have little excuse to not partake in the global buffet of men.

sorry, but biology is biology.

Biology IS biology, but saying that and posting something with unsourced data from a pseudoscience blog isn't biology. It's not anything except a strawman to the argument being presented: Yes, there are biological differences between men and women, and both men and women are choosing to have children later in life. But there's been no ethical argument presented, and no correlation between 'feminism' and this phenomenon.

Tl;dr- ITT is probably another /pol/tard pretending to know science and trawl for data that doesn't exist in order to continue to insulate his echo chamber, or gain some lube for the circlejerk.

sorry girl, but the wall is real.

nobody will think you're hot at 35.

>wordpress.com

Why are you even on Veeky Forums? Go back to /pol/ where your circlejerking friends can suck your opinion dick on everything like always.

t. butthurt roastie

>/pol/yp can't defend his own source and instead resorts to Twitter tier shitposting out of his own salt

>rationalmale.wordpress.com
Jesus fucking christ.
Just go.

Yeah, and humans have been saying fuck biology for centuries.

Or did you forget the part where man was not biologically built to fly but we kept building artificial flying mechanisms until we got it right and now share sky with birds on a daily basis?

Point is no amount of studies and experts are going to sway young women now that they're starting to get a taste of expansive freedom. At this point you literally have to tie them down with stone age tradition via religion and even that is starting to falter.

Yes, attractiveness is pretty much gone by 35. But how in god's name does this prove any of the points you set out to prove?

I always find it hilarious that /pol/ shits on people who would major in any pesudo-science, or a non-science, yet they do the same shit.

most polls confer the peak female attractiveness years at 23.

Not my fault male biology coincides with female peak fertile years.

>but source
no need source on well known biology facts.

>most polls confer the peak female attractiveness years at 23.

And most polls said Donald Trump was going to lose. Now the fuck is going to become President.

Again your studies don't mean shit user. Women are going to fucking do whatever they want to do and we're stuck with it, so deal with it.

>no need source on well known biology facts

But attractiveness isn't a biological quantity. It's in large part a non-genetic psychological quantity, meaning that biology takes its hands off of it and the study is left to psychologists who study associations and pavlovian conditioning.

It's not even well known biologically when the human female fertility years peak, due to the amount of factors involved. Are you talking about a female in a higher class first world setting, or a lower class first world setting, or a third world setting? Are there proper resources for childbirth being given, and in relatively consistent measure?

There are so many factors at play, that unless we know what the group used to study this consisted of, we can't even begin to discuss what the data implies. Fertility might peak later for poorer populations, because nutrition might be less secure. Or, earlier. We can't tell unless we analyze data based on these different factors, OR we're given indication that the studies on peak fertility were done in such a way that it was controlled.

I'll repeat again.

The peak age for females in terms of sexual appeal is 15-25.

Not a single male will consider a female older than 25 hot and sexy.

>but look at the MILF porn
and they try to look as young as possible.

There's a reason why women feel the Wall when they hit 28-30 and they see males stop giving them looks and they now have to compete with 22 year old girls.

Are u a women?
becuase only women will delude they can compete with younger women when they're hags.

male interest in females is 80-90% looks.

>Not a single male will consider a female older than 25 hot and sexy.
[citation needed]

Stop strawmanning. I'm not a woman, and I'm not arguing anything about sexual competition, not in the slightest. I'm just trying to gain where you're getting your data from, so as to be able to call it 'scientific'.

We're on Veeky Forums, after all.

[Citation Needed]

I remember this was the most heavily nodded board on Veeky Forums. Nothing but Pol troll treads.

Have I been gone that long?

Keep repeating if you want but it doesn't mean shit.

The studies won't change the fact that women are having kids later in life and having more partners during their life.

Modded*

the most search porn tags are the ones that deal with young or teen girls.

cinemablend.com/celebrity/Top-10-Porn-Searches-2015-According-Pornhub-109827.html?story_page=9

teen is the second most searched porn tag.

Congratulations, you've provided evidence that pornography users prefer younger women.

However, where is the evidence that suggests this directly correlates with fertility?

autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/large-study-parent-age-autism-finds-increased-risk-teen-moms

older women tend to have kids with autism newfag.

>My porn sites and autism awareness associations are good sources guys!

lol OP how newru?

t. deluded roastie who still haven't hit the wall

The study that article references literally states
"Advancing paternal and maternal age have both been associated with risk for autism spectrum disorders (ASD). However, the shape of the association remains unclear, and results on the joint associations is lacking."

This shows a general trend towards an increased risk, but it does not define any kind of domain you can call a 'peak', nor does it show what the risk chance looks like with age.

No correlation with infertility, though.

>Though previous studies had identified a link between advancing parental age and autism risk, many aspects of the association remained unclear. For example, some studies found increased risk with older dads but not moms.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_and_female_fertility

does it matter if women arent having birth, theres too many faggots on this world we should lower the population by having women work their asses off for 3/4 of a pay kek

Not an argument

Try again when you grow up out of high school and understand things like "facts" and "verifiability".

There's good, sourced data in this article. However, what data are you trying to use for your argument?

I would say that there's enough combined with the earlier data you showed that suggests correlation between females who are younger having more sex appeal and also being more fertile.

However, is this necessarily proof that this correlation is causation? I can think of an alternative explanation with equal validity. As a person ages, they gain more scars, and as they grow they typically become less symmetrical and more 'worn'. Beauty standards rely largely on symmetry, smooth skin, and a proper, healthy weight- all of these more common in younger women.

I can't take that explanation as fact, but it's an alternative explanation to the 'younger women are more attractive' phenomenon.

Can you cite anything that shows a direct correlation, or at least the implication that the phenomenon has a causatory relationship with the other phenomenon with fertility?

livescience.com/14995-blood-type-linked-earlier-decline-fertility.html

>Because Pal's study included only women seeking fertility treatment, she cautioned that the findings of her study do not apply to the general population.

Ignoring that, because all studies have their uncertainties, this would only go so far as to suggest a further genetic factor to fertility. What argument are you trying to make from that suggestion?

look at the average age of the participants.

Yes, there's evidence, as the wikipedia article linked and the studies inside suggested, that shows that the older you get, the more infertile you become.

Simply put, it doesn't show anything particularly new here in the argument, that of the 544 people (which, compared to the general population, is a very small sample size) looking for treatment, the average age is 35. Hell, if you have 10 people looking for help, and 3 of them are 70 years old, and 7 are 20 years old, you'd have an average of 35.

...

I showed you that being older:
- Less sexual appeal
- More risk of having children with disseases
- More risk of being infertile

Those are facts of females, unless you wanna disagree with them.

30 is the age where women start to feel old because they see they can't compete with 20 year old girls.

I'm not claiming this is how all males feel, but personally it seems I feel the strongest desire towards 13-17.

I'm not saying there are no attractive 30 y.o. women but if you compared a super sexy 30 to an average 16, the latter would be hotter by orders of magnitude!

Note: this does not invalidate feminism, nor is my comment meant to make women feel bad; just sayin'


BTW I have no experience acting on said desires. Thoughts only.
Endless. Persistent. Thoughts.

You did show those things, but you haven't shown any causal relationship between those three points, only a correlation.

You can argue that the second and third are substantiated with some of the evidence, but the first has only been connected with being older, not directly with the risk of infertility.

"30 is the age where women start to feel old because they can't compete with 20 year old girls." is not a substantiated conclusion.

"30 is the age where women are less fertile than before" is correct. But the same can be said of 29 from 28, 28 from 27, etc.

At no point have you shown that women feel old at that point- nor have you shown any 'causation' (you used the word because) between the ability to compete with 20 year old girls and this feeling of being old.

It is a potential hypothesis- but without further data, the hypothesis is no more valid than a competing hypothesis, for which I will construct one.

Being older:
-Less sex appeal
-More risk of having children with diseases
-More risk of being infertile

From this data, I provide the following hypothesis. As a woman ages, fertility decreases due to the gradual decrease in hormones related to fertility.

There's a higher risk of having children with diseases as women who are older have had more encounters with physically strenuous or mentally taxing situations. This could be that stress, mentally or physically, over a lifetime can increase chance of complication for childbirth.

Women who are older have less sex appeal, possibly due to a gradual decrease in skin purity and symmetry, both of which are psychologically favored as facets of beauty. Hence, having those features would be the cause of more sex appeal, rather than simply being young being the cause.

These are all different explanations that haven't been shot down, that can describe the same phenomena. Please, show how your phenomena are linked in a causatory fashion.

are u a women?

No, why?

why do you deny that males find the most sexy women in the range I mentioned?

I don't deny this. I actually agreed that the data you showed suggested this. I only think you haven't shown the
younger is sexy -> because of fertility link.