Because there's nothing wrong with liking the asthetic of a teenage girl? An AOC of 18 is absolutely absurd, to have any decent amount of children you'd have to get to breeding as soon as you meet(unless you want to get to know girls who are a couple years off and get arrested for as little as a hug). Starting a relationship who hasn't quite met an ideal age to start breeding gives you a bit to get acquainted with each other before popping out kids. I'm not suggesting it be legal to have sex with prepubescent girls nor am I suggesting that it should be acceptable to engage in any sexual activities with a girl who isn't a few years into puberty at least. I'd say sexual activity should start maybe six months to no more than a year before she's at a safe age to give birth to a healthy child.
The current laws do nothing but reduce our birthrates and turn our girls into whores.
That’s stupid. Everyone who argues this is an insane pedo pusher. Trying to move that overton window to 14, then 12, then 8, etc... I did a lot of family tree research, and no ones grandma was married at 13 or 14. Even in the late 1800s, my ancestors were getting married between 18-22. The males were usually mid twenties. If you have kids starting at 22, and had a child every two years, you could easily have 6-9 kids (if you had all Singleton pregnancies.)
Don’t believe me? Even Pedo pushing jewgle admits this. Google age of marriage by century and you get:
In 1890, when the U.S. Census Bureau started collecting marriage data, it was recorded that the average age of a first marriage for men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years.
That’s stupid. Everyone who argues this is an insane pedo pusher.
Given that I'm arguing this I'm not sure who you're trying to convince.
rying to move that overton window to 14,
But that's sensible! I'm not going to bullshit and say that it isn't a slippery slope but the current state is just as kiked as the bottom of that slope so we should aim for a non-degenerate middle ground
I did a lot of family tree research, and no one’s grandma was married at 13 or 14. Even in the late 1800s, my ancestors were getting married between 18-22. The males were usually mid twenties. If you had kids starting at 22, and had a child every two years, you could easily have 6-9 kids (if you had all Singleton pregnancies.)
Jews have been jewing for a long time, by the 1890s they already had a strong grip on the press. I don't understand what a young woman would be doing at home for so long after reaching a degree of sexual maturity.
It goes back to the Roman Empire. It was true in the Middle Ages. It’s been true since the birth of America. The only girls who married that young were the very wealthy. That was done mostly for political reasons and to ensure virginity. Most regular men were not ready to master trades and support a family until their 20s. Most women were not able to leave home until their late teens/early 20s. Many of them worked and contributed to create their own dowries, as many were poor and unable to increase their status without first learning trades, housekeeping, etc. many worked as servants or maids as well before marrying. So, no, this history where every girl was getting married at 14 was just not reality. At least not in western civilization.
‘in reality, marriage at such a young age was largely restricted to the nobility, with the average age at marriage in the general population estimated at 20–25 years,22
22. 22 Bennett 1987, 71.
View all notes
and perhaps even later following the Black Death.23
That is just a quick source, but any research will lead you to a similar conclusion- poll tax instated at 14 (when girls began working) and marriage in early 20s.
So, it’s always been an exception. Just as Elvis was an exception not representing American marriage when he married Lisa Marie.
view the rest of the comments →
CinderBiter ago
Lmao dafuq are there downvoats on this? Is it not true? Or are you a bitch? Come out and tell me how many nukes Israel has
Soyboy69 ago
Because there's nothing wrong with liking the asthetic of a teenage girl? An AOC of 18 is absolutely absurd, to have any decent amount of children you'd have to get to breeding as soon as you meet(unless you want to get to know girls who are a couple years off and get arrested for as little as a hug). Starting a relationship who hasn't quite met an ideal age to start breeding gives you a bit to get acquainted with each other before popping out kids. I'm not suggesting it be legal to have sex with prepubescent girls nor am I suggesting that it should be acceptable to engage in any sexual activities with a girl who isn't a few years into puberty at least. I'd say sexual activity should start maybe six months to no more than a year before she's at a safe age to give birth to a healthy child.
The current laws do nothing but reduce our birthrates and turn our girls into whores.
Deplorabelle ago
That’s stupid. Everyone who argues this is an insane pedo pusher. Trying to move that overton window to 14, then 12, then 8, etc... I did a lot of family tree research, and no ones grandma was married at 13 or 14. Even in the late 1800s, my ancestors were getting married between 18-22. The males were usually mid twenties. If you have kids starting at 22, and had a child every two years, you could easily have 6-9 kids (if you had all Singleton pregnancies.)
Don’t believe me? Even Pedo pushing jewgle admits this. Google age of marriage by century and you get:
In 1890, when the U.S. Census Bureau started collecting marriage data, it was recorded that the average age of a first marriage for men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years.
Soyboy69 ago
Given that I'm arguing this I'm not sure who you're trying to convince.
But that's sensible! I'm not going to bullshit and say that it isn't a slippery slope but the current state is just as kiked as the bottom of that slope so we should aim for a non-degenerate middle ground
Jews have been jewing for a long time, by the 1890s they already had a strong grip on the press. I don't understand what a young woman would be doing at home for so long after reaching a degree of sexual maturity.
Deplorabelle ago
It goes back to the Roman Empire. It was true in the Middle Ages. It’s been true since the birth of America. The only girls who married that young were the very wealthy. That was done mostly for political reasons and to ensure virginity. Most regular men were not ready to master trades and support a family until their 20s. Most women were not able to leave home until their late teens/early 20s. Many of them worked and contributed to create their own dowries, as many were poor and unable to increase their status without first learning trades, housekeeping, etc. many worked as servants or maids as well before marrying. So, no, this history where every girl was getting married at 14 was just not reality. At least not in western civilization.
‘in reality, marriage at such a young age was largely restricted to the nobility, with the average age at marriage in the general population estimated at 20–25 years,22
22. 22 Bennett 1987, 71.
View all notes
and perhaps even later following the Black Death.23
23. 23 Goldberg 1992, 358.
View all notes’ https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00766097.2015.1119392
That is just a quick source, but any research will lead you to a similar conclusion- poll tax instated at 14 (when girls began working) and marriage in early 20s.
So, it’s always been an exception. Just as Elvis was an exception not representing American marriage when he married Lisa Marie.
This slippery slope of consent will Not work.