The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
credited childbearing age for women = 19 to 23 or so
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 27th, 2013 4:59 PM Author: Charismatic alpha it's probably better for career women in the long-run. instead of taking time away from work in order to raise infants while in their 30's, they push that out of the way early on, and by the time they are that age, the kids are already sort of autonomous, and don't need constant supervision.
i'm not sure why more women don't do this. it seems a lot easier on body and mind than waiting until the waning years of fertility. |
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:02 PM Author: flushed low-t national But lack of maturity at that age might make for shittier motherhood. I think the sweet spot is more mid 20s to 30. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722161) |
 |
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:05 PM Author: Charismatic alpha they shouldn't be single moms; they should get together with a somewhat older, more mature/stable guy and form a family. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722181) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:07 PM Author: spectacular nibblets so basically the rich have always had this one right (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722190) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:09 PM Author: Charismatic alpha easily. also, while advanced paternal age is associated with crappier sperm and more defects, advanced MATERNAL age is even worse. when two olds (and by that i mean mid-30's or later) get together and have kids, the chances of autism or other "syndromes" goes way up. having a younger mother reduces those odds greatly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722206) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:10 PM Author: flushed low-t national This doesn't really respond to my point (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722219) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:12 PM Author: Charismatic alpha i'm not sure what you mean by "shittier." they're younger; they'll have more energy to keep up with the kids. it's not like the average early-20's mom would make outrageously awful parental decisions (like feeding the kid meth or something) relative to a 30's woman. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722239) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:15 PM Author: flushed low-t national they'll want to be young and live a fun lifestyle and not devote themselves to motherhood (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722253) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:16 PM Author: Charismatic alpha sure; it's a tradeoff. i just think that women discount the advantages of this approach, or never consider it at all, and downplay the major disadvantages of waiting for many more years to have kids. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722266) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:32 PM Author: flushed low-t national I had a 100% lib feminist professor who thought that in general people should have kids much earlier and focus on their careers later. She said it didn't make any sense to have us trying to go through school when we were all horny and hormonal and distracted. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722407) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:22 PM Author: razzle tan organic girlfriend box office Only because the matriarchy has brainwashed them into thinking that the early 20s are for spreading your legs and getting drunk and not raising a family (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722312) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:50 PM Author: frum mind-boggling lettuce stead do you have any friends (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722526) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:03 PM Author: frum mind-boggling lettuce stead early to mid 20s makes the most intuitive sense to me, yeah. interestingly, women hit peak fertility at 24-25 on average. not sure why it was traditional for so long for women to start popping them out at 15. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722168) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:03 PM Author: flushed low-t national life was short as fuck, and you needed to have a lot of kids because you needed manual labor and also some would inevitably die (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722174) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:05 PM Author: spectacular nibblets probably because you need to have like 12 for 3 or 4 to survive (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722179) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:26 PM Author: Federal razzle-dazzle liquid oxygen university yeah it is a mystery since its not like they didnt have plan b contraception or anything when fjording the mighty mo (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722356) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:06 PM Author: spectacular nibblets pretty much credited, much easier to have young kids and do college than a career, but then you miss out on sloring around at college, which is the primary aim of white women (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722182) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 5:07 PM Author: Thirsty red hissy fit lodge the body can recover nicely when they poop one out at 18. super slender tight milfs are proof god loves us. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22722196) |
|
Date: February 27th, 2013 9:30 PM Author: Charismatic alpha it's also easier for women to lose the baby weight. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22723875) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2013 7:02 PM Author: Charismatic alpha Higher Maternal Age Predicts Risk of Autism
The researchers compared the risk of autism in different groups of material age (under 20, 24-29, 30-34, and 35+). They found that children of mothers older than 35 years had 30% increased risk for autism. Children of mothers under 20 had the lowest risk of developing autism. The association between advancing maternal age and risk for autism was stronger for male offspring and children diagnosed in more recent years.
The analysis included 25,687 cases of autism spectrum disorder and over 8.6 million control subjects, drawn from the 16 epidemiological papers that fit inclusion criteria for the study as defined by the investigators. The researchers identified and discussed several potential underlying causes of the association between maternal age and risk for autism such as increased occurrence of gene alteration during the aging process and the effects of exposure to environmental toxins over time.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120426104959.htm |
|
Date: February 28th, 2013 7:03 PM Author: Canary hall factory reset button fertility peaks at 26-27 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22729957) |
|
Date: March 1st, 2013 9:07 PM Author: Charismatic alpha not really relevant, since a woman in her early 20's is more than fertile enough as it is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22737615) |
|
Date: March 1st, 2013 9:08 PM Author: well-lubricated jewess (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22737627) |
|
Date: March 1st, 2013 9:08 PM Author: well-lubricated jewess (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22737623) |
|
Date: March 3rd, 2013 1:10 AM Author: Scarlet School Cafeteria "apparently it's up in the air"
apparently youre fucking retarded [it is 2009]
http://i.imgur.com/nRLTLvY.gif
in b4 you reply that you said you've seen 20-24. in reality 19 is better than 25 and yet you also said it could be 30 and that it's up in the air. it's not 30 or up in the air and you can't just quote yourself suggesting a huge range + uncertainty and then claim you were right because the actual data fit somewhere in huge range + uncertainty
and no "i think general consensus is 24-25" isn't right either since fertility doesn't peak at 24-25 and there's no consensus that it does.
try harder to post accurate information instead of vague bullshit you've inaccurately summarized from some npr story about relationship norms in the age of twitterbook and matchharmony.com
http://paa2005.princeton.edu/papers/50585
ur done here |
|
Date: March 20th, 2013 3:10 AM Author: well-lubricated jewess (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22849252) |
|
Date: March 20th, 2013 3:13 AM Author: well-lubricated jewess (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22849258) |
|
Date: March 20th, 2013 3:13 AM Author: rusted bawdyhouse wtf? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22849259) |
|
Date: March 1st, 2013 9:13 PM Author: blue harsh spot also their body recovers like it never happened (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22737666) |
|
Date: March 3rd, 2013 12:14 AM Author: Charismatic alpha (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22744433) |
|
Date: March 3rd, 2013 12:15 AM Author: boyish dun yarmulke lay ya'll are gay (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22744443) |
|
Date: March 20th, 2013 3:07 AM Author: Charismatic alpha (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22849240) |
|
Date: March 20th, 2013 3:07 AM Author: well-lubricated jewess (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#22849243) |
|
Date: November 9th, 2025 11:51 PM Author: nyuug (Gangnam WGWAG Playboy) ITT: cumskins scuffle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#49415953) |
|
Date: November 10th, 2025 6:42 PM Author: nyuug (Gangnam WGWAG Playboy) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2194132&forum_id=2...id.#49418442) |