I don't post this to be mean, but sometimes I can't help it. Someone better screengrab these posts for the common good.
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Modern women - age and fertility
Modern women have become so inoperably solipsistic, deranged and narcissistic that they believe any self-reflection is to manipulate themselves.If they stopped projecting their internalized misogyny and started taking accountability, like the strong, independent women they claim to be, they would realize that their petri dish veganas, diseased uteruses and polluted wombs are now unfit for creating life.
Instead, these aging women shame the relatively few remaining young women into being anything other than women as they're ultimately misled to forgo pregnancy, they also lobby against families and motherhood, then, in contradiction to their past words and actions, and out of unadmitted desperation before nature takes its course, they proceed to subject themselves to more invasive treatment than your token cancer patient just to be able to produce the offspring they spent their lives working against.
Now, there's a reason the success rate for IVF over the age of 35 is under 5%. It's because a 40-year-old's endometrium is fricked. The embryo might be viable, but the geriatric womb can't support it, which results in spontaneous abortions. Even if they gestate potential offspring, they can't function from within the womb without clomid, progestin, and estradiol wienertails. And if the child is born, it is considerably more likely to have endocrine and autoimmune issues, which is due to prenatal stressors and methylation.
But what about the people who still manage to have kids till their 40s, much how like people did in the past?
It's statistically considerably easier to get pregnant and have pregnancies to term if you've previously had children beforehand. Moveover, people in the past had kids in the teens and 20s, which made it far easier to continue having children in their 30s and 40s. That's why, in statistics, you plot for fecundity based on the first pregnancy to the current term in question.
Women can dope up on all the antioxidants, prenatal supplements and nootropics as they like, but having their little boy or girl late in life will result in it never being as fit and healthy as it could have been if they didn't waste time. It is physically impossible for that child to be anywhere near perfect, since rates of methylation are correlated with maternal age with a CI of 95, and a sigma of 0.7.
Moreover, pre-natal intrauterine androgen is inversely correlated with maternal age, which is why it's considerably more likely to produce children with hypogonadism, endometriosis, and fallopian collapse.
Finally, it's statistically more likely to be unable to produce breast milk the older you are due to prolactin and oxytocin down-regulation, which is tied to pituitary sensitization. Older mothers are also found to have less IgGA antibodies in their breast milk than younger mothers.
Therefore, your child allegedly turned out fine, but it's still worse off than if he or she was born to a young mother.
There's also a monumental difference when you have had children starting from a young age, which is when you're supposed to.
Every pregnancy a woman goes through stops her menstrual cycle for 9 months, putting her ovaries into a 9 month stasis, prolonging her overall fertility. If a woman starts having kids at age 16, and has 12 kids by age 33, then over those 17 years she has basically saved no less than 12 years’ worth of fertility relative to a woman who has her first child at 33. Each kid is 9 months, plus at the very least 3-6 more months immediately after birth until she starts menstruating again.
In this scenario, the womb of that 33-year-old is like if she was 21 and having her first child. This is why women of bygone generations could have 15 or more kids without a problem and keep going into their 40s.
Every month the carton loses another egg. If you keep having kids, you keep the eggs in the carton for longer.
It's also not just about the ovarian reserve. The endometrium and uterine lining change permanently after a birth, as well as all the receptors that were created, alongside the dendritic synapses, which is thanks to the steroid and peptide hormone up-regulation. It's considerably easier for the body to transform for gestation, and the embryo finds it way easier to attach, since the uterus is anatomically primed. Even the brain changes permanently following birth. The oxytocin receptors in the orbitofrontal cortex are tripled.
How about older men, aren't they just as bad?
No, spermatozoa are replenished every 48 hours, whereas women get their entire ovarian reserve while gestating in the womb.
The male gametes are different from female gametes. Spermatogenesis is different from oogenesis. The oocytes are in suspended apoptosis, a process that's called meiotic arrest, since the woman is herself a bi-pedal embryo housing.
The rates of mutation, as a result of DNA methylation and fragmented translation, are considerably higher in oocytes, which is precisely because they only undergo meiosis I and II right before they fall in the fallopian tube for fertilization.
Spermatozoa mutation has less to do with age, and more to do with endocrine stressors. Ergo, men that live in environments without endocrine and carcinogenic stressors don't exhibit any appreciable rates of gametic mutation.
However, endocrine stressors do accumulate with age and, given a polluted environment, are contaminating spermatozoa along with general health. Ergo, you can argue paternal age does play a part with spermatozoa quality and viability, since it's statistically quantifiable despite being dishonest from a biological standpoint.
Therefore, the male software does not degrade with age, but an environment can make the male hardware degrade, which subsequently affects the reproductive software. A male who is fundamentally healthy and living in an uncontaminated environment will see no statistically ponderable decrease in fertility throughout his life.
The phenomenon of ageing as a molecular mechanism gets worse.
There is a part of our DNA called transposable elements (TEs), which constitute one of the key aspects of why we age. TEs are also useful evolutionarily, since they speed up evolution, which is why we have them in the first place.
TEs are most active in the oocyte (the eggs in a woman's ovary). With women giving birth later and later, they are essentially giving birth to genetically older people. This effect accumulates over generations. If we keep this up, future generations will be born too genetically old to reproduce.
An estimate time of when that would happen would require a consortium of multiple research groups and massive funding, but with the sharp increase in polygenic disorders, rare genetic disorders, nervous disorders, etc. people will realise the consequences.
The basics of ageing in general:
The Hallmarks of Aging
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836174/
The role transposon play in ageing:
The role of retrotransposable elements in ageing and age-associated diseases
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34349292/
Transposons in oocytes:
Hijacking Oogenesis Enables Massive Propagation of LINE and Retroviral Transposons
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30057117/
So in order to reverse aging you would need to shock whales so they dont beach?
>starts having kids at age
Too old
Women should be fertilized after or during their first period.
That's a bit too young.
newhomosexuals ironic
old chan culture want their website back
Mother figure of Christianity, Mary conceived Jesus at 11 and give birth to Christ aged 12
Mother figure Aisha of Islam married prophet Muhammad at 9 and was engaged to him 3 years prior.
Modern nu-christians are eternal golems of israelites arguing to further raise the aoc until they've lost half or more of their eggs. You're literally committing self induced genocide by waiting before having big happy white families.
I'm not white so I can't have a white family also who wants to walk around with a wife who everyone mistakes for your daughter?
>mistakes for your daughter
If you're a same aged couple, literally how?
No one's getting you a wife when you can't even afford your own expenses. Also never ever marry your age because after 3-4 kids she will start looking like your mother as men are naturally good looking if they keep fit but women deteriorate
If she doesn't want you when you're both in school then you shouldn't want her either when you make it.
Men race while entitled women wait at the finish line.
Only if she was there for you supporting the race is she worth your time.
What are you talking about?
>What are you talking about?
No u, what are you talking about?
That it's best to marry a 14-16 year old when you're in your mid20s and are financially stable
This lies at the heart of all of this
These roastie prostitutes give themselves away to Chad for free and when Chad kicks them out of their harem due to being too old and busted and other Chads won't let her into his harem too/only pump and dump her once ONLY THEN does the roastie think about the betabuxxer fallback option she never gave the time of day before (and that she doesn't plan on staying with either, prefering divorce rape after shitting out a kid or two that will have Chad's telegonic DNA in it even if it's actually biologically the betabuxxer's kid, and there's only a 50% chance of that with your average modern roastie prostitute)
It's so insanely hillarious and hypocritical, but luckily men are much smarter than womemes and thus a great majority of us figured this game they're playing out a while ago already. Womemes are slow to catch up as usual, hence only now some of them started LARPing as trad chameleons to cater to betabuxxers who have turned away from their rigged game and gone for higher quality asian women instead.
Nah that causes problems. 14-16 is best age
Agreed
SILENCE INFIDEL!
why you talking about woman but your picrel is a man. you fricking donkey
All the good looking women who would make great wives and mothers are taken in high school and college the latest. Whatever remains is taken shortly after they enter the workforce. There exist very few good looking (7 and above) women that are single and have a good heart, are modest, raised in a decent family, soft spoken and pretty. The window of opportunity when they are single is very very narrow. These are the 2% of women, the highest stock of females this wonderful creation can offer. If you don't frequent their circles or the events they attend you have no chance of meeting them. Women also don't go anywhere alone, so whatever hobbies women have or events they attend it is done with their husband or boyfriend and if they are single with their groups of friends.
Boomers and gen-x are throwing money at young pussy like never before, we are talking boat trips, exotic trips, paying their rent and bills, buying them gifts, trips to beauty salons, etc. Many of them have net worths in the millions. Just look at all those modelling agencies and realize how many pretty girls are being baited to frick the rich and upper class.
Then there are chad millennials and chad zoomers who get their first pick at all the young pussy.
Then at the end of the line there is you anon, the average nobody with no money, no charisma, no looks, no social circle, no experiences and no toys.
tldr; there simply aren't enough single good looking young white women to go around for everybody, they are rare and exist mostly in very niche places where men without social circles (loners) can't get in to
>tldr; there simply aren't enough single good looking young white women to go around for everybody,
I think most people only exist due to over-population, whereby their existence is based on an over-leveraged food supply and what not.
There are enough of the right women, but the rest of society hampers them and the corresponding men.
>There are enough of the right women
There are more good hearted, modest, raised in a decent family, soft spoken women than 2% sure, but they won't be pretty. I couldn't say what percentage of women those would but it's not that high either.
>but they won't be pretty.
Have you noticed that good looking children can come from mediocre looking parents and often do?
I also think what most of us see as pretty and the like are bonus features that may or may not come with the fundamentally attrative traits of the right bone structure and general shape that preferably comes with above-average height.
so inn short women will cause the dofall of humanity, unsurprising, since during all of history all of the stories of creation involve the woman being seen as the reason why humanity cant live i peace, and every single on is a cautionary tale not ment to be interpreted literally instead the wise men though of how we can tell the men of the future not to give women rights, instead you have morons doing exactly that in perpetuity for endless civilisational cycles. our only hope is tht with technology we can stop this cycle, with AI and artificial wombs, but alas, the civilisational collapse of the west is looming and will plunge us into a new dark age which will likely last for generations
Women are only symptomatic of men, and irresponsibly so.
My god Emma used to be so beautiful
I would make uwu on her face.
>Essential graph to understand hypergamous feminist femgroid mating behaviour