~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Never Date the Dead or DyingThe first link you sent from the "antifeminist" (very reliable and unbiased source btw) was literally just a graph made by a random person on a computer, not based on any real empirical data. Following the logic given by the graph, a newborn fucking baby is more desirable than a 25 yr old? .... The paper you linked doesn't prove any of your arguments. In fact, it supports the argument that although a 14 year old child may have what they call a "high reproductive value" (since she has more years … | /r/TheRedPill | 25/08/16 12:52 AM |
| 0 | Never Date the Dead or DyingA woman's fertility peaks in her teens Source? I don't know how you can dismiss scientific facts, like the ones I stated in my previous comment from [this source] (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199504273321701) that says women under 20 are not as biologically equipped to carry and give birth to children as women in their early 20s. Where are your sources that say 15 yr old girls are more fertile? There are none, because it's false. Many girls don't even get their periods by that age, … | /r/TheRedPill | 24/08/16 06:29 PM |
| 8 | Never Date the Dead or DyingDepends what "past" you're talking about, and where. During the late 18th century to the end of the industrial revolution both men and women married and had children in their late 20s/early 30s, similar to today. I remember reading the average age was something like 27 since both men and women began working more out of the house during that time. As I said in a previous comment, I'd also like to point out to you guys that a woman's prime is NOT in her teens, and certainly not at 14. [Having chil… | /r/TheRedPill | 22/08/16 05:10 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter