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).

[Edmund_Kemper]

There’s a lot of evidence against that claim. Girls younger than 16 have no significantly greater risk of pregnancy complications than girls older than 18, and actually have a lower risk of certain complications such as caesarian section and gestational diabetes:

• "The purpose of this study was to determine if early adolescence imparts a significant obstetric risk in young primiparas relative to adult primiparas. The records of 239 young primiparas (< 16 years) and 148 older primiparas (18–29 years) were reviewed for demographic information, antepartum complications, mode of delivery, length of labor, episiotomy, lacerations, birthweight, and length of gestation. [...] The incidence of most antenatal complications (chronic hypertension, pregnancy-induced hypertension, placental abruption, placenta previa, premature rupture of the membranes, urinary tract infections, and anemia) were similar between the two groups. Preterm labor and contracted pelvis were more common among the young adolescent, while gestational diabetes was less common. The young primiparas were significantly (P <. 05) less likely to have a Cesarean delivery and to lacerate with vaginal delivery. The length of labor and its stages were similar, as were overall birthweight and length of gestation. Thus, obstetric concerns regarding pregnancy in early adolescence may be unfounded. With the exception of an increased risk for preterm labor, it appears that pregnancy, labor, and delivery do not pose inordinate obstetric and medical risk to the very young adolescent primipara." (source)

A study found that the correlation between early pregnancy and significantly worse outcomes is likely non-causative:

• "A broad set of academic literatures shows that childbearing is associated with a variety of negative health outcomes for teenage mothers. Many researchers question whether teenage childbearing is the causal explanation for the negative outcomes (i.e., whether there is a biological effect of teenage childbearing or whether the relationship is due to other factors correlated with health and teenage childbearing). This study investigates the relationship between teenage childbearing and labor and delivery complications using a panel of confidential birth certificate data over the period from 1994 to 2003 from the state of Texas. Findings show that compared to mothers aged 25 to 29 having their first child, teenager mothers appear to have superior health in most--but not all--labor and delivery outcomes." (source)

A study, funded by the UN and WHO came to conclusions those feminist institutions were not expecting:

• Analysis for individual countries showed substantial heterogeneity; some showed a clear J-shaped curve, whereas in others adolescents had a slightly lower maternal mortality ratio than women in their early 20s [...] Our findings suggest that the excess mortality risk to adolescent mothers might be less than previously believed, and in most countries the adolescent maternal mortality ratio is low compared with women older than 30 years." (source)

Amusingly, science has also figured out that African-American women, no matter the age, have much higher risk pregnancies than white women. I hope nobody dares to say that nature doesn't want them to breed....

The reason why female animals (including humans) go through menstruation only once they have reached a certain age would seem to be because that protects them from excessively early pregnancies. Thus, it is rare for an individual to get pregnant too young as nature prevents this.. This makes perfect sense as animals do not have a concept of an age of consent– they just fuck when they like. This principle has also applied to humans in less cucked periods, hence the expression "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed". In extremely rare cases, girls can get pregnant at a dangerously young age because of precocious puberty, but that condition only affects 0.2% of girls.

but 13 this is true, you're thinking of 15-17 year olds

also i think for 15-17 year olds it said 20.4% had some form of complication but it could be it didn't control for smoking or socioeconomic factors or lack of prenatal care. Did it control for those when revealing that percentage? I remember reading the complication rate in other studies showed a percentage lower than 1 in 5.

 

[PPEcel]

Extremely high effort

 

[DeepSea]

but 13 this is true, you're thinking of 15-17 year olds

also i think for 15-17 year olds it said 20.4% had some form of complication but it could be it didn't control for smoking or socioeconomic factors or lack of prenatal care. Did it control for those when revealing that percentage? I remember reading the complication rate in other studies showed a percentage lower than 1 in 5.

The first study specifically looked at girls younger than 16 and compared them to girls older than 18. The second study, which has a huge sample size of 276,000+ females, compared 6 different age groups: <15, 15–16, 17–18, 19–20, 21–24, and 25–29, and controlled for smoking, socioeconomic status, prenatal care, and other factors.

"When one compares teens who have never given birth to women in their mid- to late twenties who have never given birth, controlling for socioeconomic status, prenatal care, smoking and drinking during pregnancy, and a number of other factors, teenage mothers fare better than 25- to 29-year-old women for 9 of the 13 outcomes measured and no differently for two of the outcomes. The clinically and statistically significant differences in the greater rate of seizures, however, suggest an area for proactive medical monitoring among teenage mothers"

The differences in complication risks between the girls younger than 15 and the other teenage groups were mostly small and not always statistically significant. The under 15 year olds had a slightly higher risk of some pregnancy complications and a slightly lower risk of others.

 

[Necro]

LOL men peak at 50? Hope for me me yet!

 

[Deleted member 39569]

Of the 48 young men, with picture types appearing as the first member of the pair, 52% experienced positive reactions to prepubescent girls (age 4 to 10), about about 81.25% experienced positive reactions to the adolescent girls (age 12 to 16),

Although they showed a little attraction (but not very much) to 12 year old girls, they showed higher (but only somewhat high instead of very high) attraction to 13 and 14 year old girls, and they showed very high attraction to adult women in their 20s. They lacked attraction to men and boys of each age group.

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

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

The first study specifically looked at girls younger than 16 and compared them to girls older than 18. The second study, which has a huge sample size of 276,000+ females, compared 6 different age groups: <15, 15–16, 17–18, 19–20, 21–24, and 25–29, and controlled for smoking, socioeconomic status, prenatal care, and other factors.

"When one compares teens who have never given birth to women in their mid- to late twenties who have never given birth, controlling for socioeconomic status, prenatal care, smoking and drinking during pregnancy, and a number of other factors, teenage mothers fare better than 25- to 29-year-old women for 9 of the 13 outcomes measured and no differently for two of the outcomes. The clinically and statistically significant differences in the greater rate of seizures, however, suggest an area for proactive medical monitoring among teenage mothers"

The differences in complication risks between the girls younger than 15 and the other teenage groups were mostly small and not always statistically significant. The under 15 year olds had a slightly higher risk of some pregnancy complications and a slightly lower risk of others.

But they’re comparing age groups of women who never gave birth

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
View attachment 551412

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

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

 

[DeepSea]

But they’re comparing age groups of women who never gave birth

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.

 

[Deleted member 39569]

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

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

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

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

SOME men can find them somewhat attractive, it's more common for them to find 15-19 year olds hot

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.

but it said they were comparing age groups of women who never gave birth

 

[Deleted member 39569]

SOME men can find them somewhat attractive, it's more common for them to find 15-19 year olds hot

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.

 

[BlackPanther222]

Who are the people on this forum who like 9 year olds?

@Edmund_Kemper who?

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

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.

some studies showed little to no attraction to early teens (13/14). older teens was more consistent

@Edmund_Kemper who?

@DeepSea @Mystic i think were the ones as far as i can recall

 

[Deleted member 39569]

some studies showed little to no attraction to early teens (13/14). older teens was more consistent

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

 

[Draestyn]

2. pedohebephilia: slightly abnormal, though not too deviant

what is "pedohebephilia"?

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

what is "pedohebephilia"?

people who are equally attracted to prepubescent and pubescents (anyone 13 and under)

 

[Draestyn]

people who are equally attracted to prepubescent and pubescents (anyone 13 and under)

prepubescent is under 10, newly pubescent is 10-12

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

prepubescent is under 10, newly pubescent is 10-12

10-12 is still abnormal

 

[Deleted member 39569]

I'll be reading this high IQ post in a while. I am with you, pedophiles (attraction to prepubescent people) and agecucks (who say being attracted to teenage women is wrong) should be exterminated.

whats more common

being attracted to 13-14 year olds?
or
having no attraction to 13-14 year olds?

 

[Draestyn]

10-12 is still abnormal

its not as common as teens, but grouping it with under 10 would be false

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

its not as common as teens, but grouping it with under 10 would be false

It’s literally uncommon

 

[Draestyn]

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

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

having some degree of attraction at all to 10-12 year olds is more common than having 0 attraction to them

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.

 

[RREEEEEEEEE]

whats more common

being attracted to 13-14 year olds?
or
having no attraction to 13-14 year olds?

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.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

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.

Attraction to a 14 year old is normative if she looks older than her age (which could occur)

 

[RREEEEEEEEE]

Attraction to a 14 year old is normative if she looks older than her age (which could occur)

14 year olds rarely look older than their age that's why I said it's not common.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

14 year olds rarely look older than their age that's why I said it's not common.

there are times where they can look relatively physically mature it depends

 

[RREEEEEEEEE]

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.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

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.

i get attracted mostly to 14/15 to mid-late 20s (with the peak being older teens early 20s)

 

[DeepSea]

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.

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)

View attachment 550973

The rapists (who had adult victims or peer-age victims) experienced moderate (but mostly sufficient enough to qualify as an adequate response as defined later in this paragraph) sexual arousal to 15 year old girls but strong attraction to 18 to 25 year old women. They experienced minuscule attraction to 12 year old girls and no attraction to girls under 12. Their attraction started off very low at age 5 and increased with age. According to the data: "Adequate response was defined as attaining a peak response of at least 20% of full erection to at least one stimulus in any one of the auditory or visual stimulus series presented to that subject."

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.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

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.

Dude the arousal levels were close to zero that’s minuscule. That is NOT strong attraction

 

[Deleted member 39569]

Dude the arousal levels were close to zero that’s minuscule. That is NOT strong attraction

still shows attraction, and the attraction to pubescent over prepubescent would only be stronger and more common

 

[RREEEEEEEEE]

i get attracted mostly to 14/15 to mid-late 20s (with the peak being older teens early 20s)

Yeah but the point was that most 14/15 year olds don't look 18+.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Yeah but the point was that most 14/15 year olds don't look 18+.

15 year old girls sometimes can

still shows attraction, and the attraction to pubescent over prepubescent would only be stronger and more common

Minuscule attraction is not attraction only borderline

 

[Deleted member 39569]

Minuscule attraction is not attraction only borderline

thats some nice mental gymnastics you got there

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

thats some nice mental gymnastics you got there

It’s true. Just because your penis got slightly aroused doesn’t mean you find them outright attractive

 

[Deleted member 39569]

It’s true. Just because your penis got slightly aroused doesn’t mean you find them outright attractive

then what qualifies as attraction? seems to be arbitrary to some degree i suppose

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

then what qualifies as attraction? seems to be arbitrary to some degree i suppose

It can’t be minuscule it has to be at least fairly high

 

[Deleted member 39569]

It can’t be minuscule it has to be at least fairly high

fairly high is still arbitrary

especially when you have a bunch of conflicting studies

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

fairly high is still arbitrary

especially when you have a bunch of conflicting studies

Nope it’s consistent when it comes to 15-16 year olds, it’s inconsistent and conflicting with girls under 15

 

[Deleted member 39569]

Nope it’s consistent when it comes to 15-16 year olds, it’s inconsistent and conflicting with girls under 15

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

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

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

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

 

[Deleted member 39569]

Dude some studies they won’t find 13 year olds attractive and when they do it’s only somewhat

and other studies show it is decently high

and those studies weren’t even flawed in data

what is flawed in data and what is not? @DeepSea

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

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

 

[Mainländer]

Thus, it is rare for an individual to get pregnant too young as nature prevents this.. This makes perfect sense as animals do not have a concept of an age of consent– they just fuck when they like. This principle has also applied to humans in less cucked periods, hence the expression "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed". In extremely rare cases, girls can get pregnant at a dangerously young age because of precocious puberty, but that condition only affects 0.2% of girls.

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.

 

[RREEEEEEEEE]

15 year old girls sometimes can

Keyword: sometimes. So it's not normative.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Keyword: sometimes. So it's not normative.

Sometimes means like 40% of them

 

[Deleted member 39569]

I do that too and I like it when the seat is warm.

do you think liking 13-14 year olds is normal or abnormal?

 

[RREEEEEEEEE]

Sometimes means like 40% of them

Still a minority so not normative.

 

[DepravedAndDeprived]

do you think liking 13-14 year olds is normal or abnormal?

Normal bro

 

[Deleted member 39569]

Normal bro

other users dont seem to think so

 

[DepravedAndDeprived]

other users dont seem to think so

Yes bro, lots of agecuckery on this board