LOL men peak at 50? Hope for me me yet!
Blackpill [MULTIPLE STUDIES] The REAL truth about the JBpill (attraction to teens is common). Agecucks will hate this (but so will pedos who like 9 year olds).
D
according to these studies, it seems to suggest attraction to young teens is still pretty common, and not significantly lower than adult females. the big drop off happens when you go to the prepubescent range
also, here's another study you didnt include, it seems to suggest JBs are more attractive than young adult women
these studies seems to be all over the place. however they all seem to suggest most men are attracted to teens, including early teens. having no attraction to early teens at all is abnormal. the big decline occurs when talking about prepubescents
E
But they’re comparing age groups of women who never gave birth
That chart didn’t come from that study. That study I read it on sci-hub.se and I didn’t find the chart. The chart isn’t even mentioned on there and doesn’t even pertain to that study. It appears to come from some Internet survey conducted by the documentary Are All Men Pedophiles? and the survey possibly caught disproportionate attention from hebephilic and ephebophilic men, which is a sampling bias. I think it’s best to rely on the phallometry studies I cited, which show a preference for young adults or older teens
Last edited:
They compared the obstetric labor and delivery complications of women and girls of different ages who were going through their first pregnancy. They excluded females who had already given birth before because second pregnancies usually have fewer problems than first pregnancies.
Last edited:
D
my point was not that men are most attracted to young teens
it was that most men are at least somewhat attracted to young teens
E
SOME men can find them somewhat attractive, it's more common for them to find 15-19 year olds hot
but it said they were comparing age groups of women who never gave birth
D
no, the studies show MOST men find them somewhat attractive, and are more commonly attracted to 15-19, and have stronger attraction to the older
it is more common, to find early teens, attractive to a degree (either low or high attraction), than it is to have zero attraction at all.
@Edmund_Kemper who?
E
some studies showed little to no attraction to early teens (13/14). older teens was more consistent
@DeepSea @Mystic i think were the ones as far as i can recall
D
15-19 is ephebophilia, post pubescent, so this should clearly be normal. It seems these studies are pretty ambiguous on hebephilia.
Or to clarify, attraction females in that age range. there's a difference between primary attraction, and general attraction. I view it from the perspective of tanner stages
1: pedophilia: abnormal and deviant
2. pedohebephilia: slightly abnormal, though not too deviant
3: hebephilia: normal but not a preference
4: hebephebophilia: also normal, and not uncommon as a preference
5: ephebephilia: obviously normal
thats my two cents anyway
what is "pedohebephilia"?
E
people who are equally attracted to prepubescent and pubescents (anyone 13 and under)
prepubescent is under 10, newly pubescent is 10-12
E
10-12 is still abnormal
D
whats more common
being attracted to 13-14 year olds?
or
having no attraction to 13-14 year olds?
its not as common as teens, but grouping it with under 10 would be false
E
It’s literally uncommon
having some degree of attraction at all to 10-12 year olds is more common than having 0 attraction to them
E
no, it isn't any more common, in fact many studies show men have no attraction, and when they do, it isn't "some", it's minuscule.
Having no attraction to 13-14 year olds. However being attracted to 15-17 year olds is very common. But due to societal pressure men will refuse to acknowledge it.
E
Attraction to a 14 year old is normative if she looks older than her age (which could occur)Having no attraction to 13-14 year olds. However being attracted to 15-17 year olds is very common. But due to societal pressure men will refuse to acknowledge it.
14 year olds rarely look older than their age that's why I said it's not common.
E
there are times where they can look relatively physically mature it depends
Yeah, maybe 1-3 out of 10, that is still a minority hence why it is technically not normative. But again it depends on the person.
E
i get attracted mostly to 14/15 to mid-late 20s (with the peak being older teens early 20s)
There are barely any studies that show no attraction to prepubescent girls, let alone pubescent girls. Most of the studies find that teleiophilic men's sexual response to prepubescent girls is about one-fourth to one-fifth as strong as their response to young adult women. That's not miniscule. 20-25% is not a miniscule percentage. A slight attraction is still an attraction. If you're starving and someone gives you slightly tasty food, it's still going to taste nice. Especially if there is no taboo against eating it.
Keep in mind that all phallometric studies, even the recent ones, use the same nude pictures of prepubescent and pubescent children that were taken circa 1970. It's no longer legal to take nudes of minors for research purposes because of hysteria about child pornography. Girls today reach puberty more than 2 years earlier on average than they did in the 1970s, and tend to be much more physically developed. So it's likely that phallometric studies greatly underestimate men's attraction to modern pubescent and prepubescent girls.
"The age of onset of biological adulthood continues to plunge. Consider the statistics provided by German researchers. They found that in 1860, the average age of the onset of puberty in girls was 16.6 years. In 1920, it was 14.6; in 1950, 13.1; 1980, 12.5; and in 2010, it had dropped to 10.5. Similar sets of figures have been reported for boys, albeit with a delay of around a year." (source)
To quote Ray Blanchard (who runs the phallometric laboratory developed by Kurt Freund):
- “The visual stimuli included images of nude pubescent and prepubescent boys and girls. These models were photographed circa 1970 after their parents signed written consent forms granting permission for the pictures to be used in clinical and research activities involving penile plethysmography at our institution. These stimuli have been used in over 10,000 phallometric tests in our laboratory. No child or adolescent model has ever returned as an adult requesting the removal of their photos from the phallometric protocol.” (source)
Actually, this study didn't find that the rapists had no attraction to girls under 12. On average, they had about 11% of a full erection when shown pictures of 5-year olds; their maximum response to adult women was 39%. So the results are more or less consistent with the other research, although for some strange reason none of the men had a full erection or even half an erection. The rapists showed more attraction to 8-year old girls than to 10-year old girls, and the pedophiles showed more attraction to 25-year old women than to 8-year old girls. These findings have never been replicated and are likely a statistical artifact of a low sample size.
Relying on samples like that means you're going to get a ridiculous amount of studies showing an effect that simply don't replicate and a ridiculous amount of studies that show no effect that would have an effect with a larger sample.
The study by E. Michael Bailey and the study by Ray Blanchard had the largest sample sizes and seem to be the most reliable ones. In both studies, teleiophilic men showed substantial attraction to pubescent girls and slight attraction to prepubescent girls.
Last edited:
E
Dude the arousal levels were close to zero that’s minuscule. That is NOT strong attraction
D
still shows attraction, and the attraction to pubescent over prepubescent would only be stronger and more common
Yeah but the point was that most 14/15 year olds don't look 18+.
E
15 year old girls sometimes can
Minuscule attraction is not attraction only borderline
D
thats some nice mental gymnastics you got there
E
It’s true. Just because your penis got slightly aroused doesn’t mean you find them outright attractivethats some nice mental gymnastics you got there
D
then what qualifies as attraction? seems to be arbitrary to some degree i suppose
E
It can’t be minuscule it has to be at least fairly high
D
fairly high is still arbitrary
especially when you have a bunch of conflicting studies
E
Nope it’s consistent when it comes to 15-16 year olds, it’s inconsistent and conflicting with girls under 15
D
that just means 15-16 is more attractive than under 15, but that does not mean 13-14 would necessarily be uncommon, just less, and that the studies are flawed in collecting such data.
even with the 15-16 the amount of attraction probably varies to a degree, its just consistently higher than 13-14
E
Dude some studies they won’t find 13 year olds attractive and when they do it’s only somewhat
and those studies weren’t even flawed in data
not to mention that the 15-16 year old attraction was high enough to the degree it was similar to attraction to 18+. And 15/16/17 year olds are finishing puberty whereas 13 year olds aren’t even close to done
D
and other studies show it is decently high
what is flawed in data and what is not? @DeepSea
yes, being finished puberty would make you more attractive as opposed midway, duh
and actually, 13 is often over halfway through puberty, not at the beginning, like a 10-11 year old. there is still a decent amount of sexual dimorphism
M
This is kinda obvious but agecucks insist on calling God an idiot who made women both fertile and attractive since early 10s on average so that men can wait many years and even decades to marry/have sex with them
Thanks for your high effort, good post.
Keyword: sometimes. So it's not normative.
E
Sometimes means like 40% of them
D
do you think liking 13-14 year olds is normal or abnormal?I do that too and I like it when the seat is warm.
Still a minority so not normative.
Normal bro
D
other users dont seem to think so
Yes bro, lots of agecuckery on this board
D
OP claims he is against agecuckery. i asked a question in the other thread and he evaded it
E
E
this should be in must read @Infinity
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
