Daily reminder that minor attraction is normal and biologically adaptive

Daily reminder that minor attraction is normal and biologically adaptive.

Other urls found in this thread:

bandolier.org.uk/booth/Risk/dyingage.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

no it isn't, you're a disgusting piece of shit. kill yourself, do it.

That's entirely wrong and promoted by patriarchal societies as a way to control women from early age.

If you don't consider women to have any value as a person, sure.

>banjo playing in the background

>Average prehistoric age of pregnancy
>It's around the age of consent in most western countries

Good showing, senpai.

t. Women

How is reproductive value at age zero anything but zero? I call schenanigans

A newborn girl has a non-zero probability of surviving to reproductive age and then having offspring.

There are very healthy and intelligent kids who's mothers were verge of menopause upon birthing.
That graph isn't reliable or valid.

Those pedophilia propagandists are the real cockroaches I tell you.

Fine but that plot is still bullshit then. It wouldn't increase linearly. It would spike up around age 1 because the risk of infant fatality has fallen. After that risk of not surviving to childbearing age is relatively low.

bandolier.org.uk/booth/Risk/dyingage.html

Look, the probability of dying under age 1 is ~1/200 but the probability of dying for ages 1-4 is 1 in 4000. By your reasoning reproductive value of a 1 year old should be 20 times higher than the reproductive value of a zero year old.

>then
It would be still. In what units
is "reproductive value" measured? Scarlett Johanssons?

>is "reproductive value" measured? Scarlett Johanssons?
that's my point. that plot has no units, no basis in science. It is just some bullshit made up by a pedophile to justify his degeneracy. Fucking meaningless

even if there is rock hard evidence that pedophilia is biologically sound i doubt it will ever become socially acceptable anytime soon

What the fuck is reproductive value? How do you quantify that? And who made that fucking graph.

Mmmh.

protip: your graph shows the probability of asd increasing from 0.8% to 1.5% hardly a major concern

t. autistic enough to know how to read plots

you're aware that that is a range of near-doubling?

>implying near doubling of a small value isn't a small value

And in fairness, that is just one disease. Young mothers are at risk for many things that older mothers are not.

Literally bullshit.

Axes are asymmetrical. Zero is for the vertical axis. Fuck off.

>promoted by patriarchal societies
a.k.a. every successful society ever
>way to control women from early age.
a.k.a. the only way to run a successful society

Do you understand the concept of statistical expectation? Why does every science funboy instantly revert to something akin to a climate change denier the moment he encounters something that disagrees with his personal politics?

>Axes are asymmetrical. Zero is for the vertical axis.
How are you on Veeky Forums and not capable of reading a graph? Zero is for both axes. Look at the space between the tick marks, retard.

but patriarchal societies are highly advanced compare to matriarchal primitive shitholes. also women begin to have sex as early as thirteen in matriarchal societies.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo

this is why we unironically need /pol/

>banjo
try a nasheed senpai

>that plot has no units
But it has numerical values on its y-axis. I wonder what they stand for.

the integral of the curve is degeneracy, so the units are dDegeneracy/dAge

reminder that your tight little white ass is going to be pounded by BBC in federal prison podesta.