Timeline
Post
Remote status
Replies
3
@Shlomo
I believe they are coming from different angles altogether. Joel wants to address the fertility crisis of Whites. If women started having children at 14, instead of going to liberal colleges, corporate jobs, and then trying to have children in their 30s, the birth rates would go up significantly.
Countries that allow women to marry and have children younger are out producing us in the war of the wombs. Nigeria had more births last year than all of Europe. Demography is destiny.
14 is too early. But the jap term Christmas cake was reasonable. (unmarried women past 25) Basically after high school women's priority should be finding a husband, not a career. In the past college worked kinda like that "Mrs degree". But then colleges transformed into indoctrination centers teaching hating men and focusing on irrelevant "careers".
@BroDrillard @Bernard @Shlomo Catholic doctrine apparently says marriage eligibility begins at 14 for women, 16 for men. Not religious though 
There is a bit of nuance to the whole discussion and even Fuentes who said some deliberately inflammatory shit, made a point about the reason for everyone hating it is that casual sex is exploitative so it doesn't even make it any better if the girl is 18. The point kinda got lost, nobody really cares to give the benefit of the doubt.
The flip side of what Davis allegedly said here would be "if her father doesn't consent, it's not legal even above 18" which would, I think, be pretty good.
There is a bit of nuance to the whole discussion and even Fuentes who said some deliberately inflammatory shit, made a point about the reason for everyone hating it is that casual sex is exploitative so it doesn't even make it any better if the girl is 18. The point kinda got lost, nobody really cares to give the benefit of the doubt.
The flip side of what Davis allegedly said here would be "if her father doesn't consent, it's not legal even above 18" which would, I think, be pretty good.