• Stop coping, and start posting. Register an account in order to gain full access to Lookism's features.

Teen pregnancies = good

Joined
Jul 3, 2020
Messages
801
Reputation
484
One prominent feminist goal is to reduce teen pregnancies as if that would be a good thing. The current dogma is to put females in schools (where they do not learn much if anything of value) instead of being able to become mothers early. Young teens are brainwashed into thinking it's somehow bad to be a teen parent.


On "I would encourage other teens to have children" they all strongly disagreed.

On "Having a baby changed my life for the better" they all strongly agreed.

This illustrates how strong the brainwashing has been, they do not recommend it to other people even though for all of them it improved their lives. It's possible they were virtue signaling giving the politically correct answer "no we do not encourage other teens to become pregnant".

It's not just them that had a good experience with teen pregnancy.


Motherhood can be a positive experience that makes sense in the lives of young women from disadvantaged backgrounds. To be effective, policy must recognize the valued social role motherhood provides for these young women. The negative long-term outcomes observed may largely be a result of their disadvantaged position within society and this should be the focus of interventions.

Girls from a young age often want to become mothers, taking care of babies. By supporting them we can make that dream a reality. Instead of dolls they will now take care of their own baby after carrying and giving birth. Having children early will allow for better bond between parent and child since the difference in age will be smaller, it will be more like a friendship relationship and better for everyone.

Early pregnancy reduces breast-cancer risk https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6199327/

By becoming pregnant and having children early in life you will be able to focus on your career later, wasting your most fertile years as a female just studying things at school you will rarely/never use besides to pass tests is insanity.

In most regions, the age distribution of maternal mortality follows a J-shaped curve, with a slightly increased risk of death in adolescents as compared to women between 20 and 24 years old

In addition, adolescents in some countries were found to be at lower risk of death than women in their early 20s and even than women in all other age groups

In contrast to the overall results, the MMR for 15-19 year-olds in Tanzania was the same as for women aged 20-24, and much lower than for women aged 25 and over, indicating that there is no excess risk of maternal death associated with adolescent pregnancy.


When no other factors are taken into account, children of teenage mothers have significantly higher odds of placement in certain special education classes and significantly higher occurrence of milder education problems, but when maternal education, marital status, poverty level, and race are controlled, the detrimental effects disappear and even some protective effects are observed.

Hence, the increased risk for educational problems and disabilities among children of teenage mothers is attributed not to the effect of young age but to the confounding influences of associated sociodemographic factors. In contrast to teen age, older maternal age has an adverse effect on a child's educational outcome regardless of whether other factors are controlled for or not.


The following french study had a similar result https://sci-hub.st/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19733429/

After adjustment for confounding factors, RRs (95% confidence interval) of fetal death and anaemia were respectively 1.37 (1.09-1.70) and 1.27 (1.15-1.40) for a 16-year-old compared to a 20-year-old mother. Younger mothers had significantly decreased risks of obstetric complications (preeclampsia, caesarean section, operative vaginal delivery and post-partum haemorrhage). Higher prevalence of prematurity and low birth weight in infants born to teenagers were not attributable to young maternal age after adjustment for confounding factors.

It is sometimes stated teen pregnancies would somehow be bad for the career, the reality is of course the opposite of that. By having children early you will be able to have your career later without interruption to have children.


The research suggests that the age at which childbearing begins is not as important as the length of time since the (most recent) birth in influencing whether or not a woman works. Having a young child consistently lowers labor force participation, whereas an early birth does not.

Of the three studies that have specifically addressed this issue, one (Koo and Bilsborrow, 1980) finds no effect of early childbearing while two studies find a weak positive effect of early childbearing on labor force participation (Hofferth et al., 1978; Card, 1979). In these studies early childbearers (female) appear to be somewhat more likely to be in the labor force 10 years after high school than later childbearers. This is probably due to several factors:

0. Since early childbearers start their families early, at 1 and 5 years after high school fewer early than later childbearers are working (Card, 1977). Ten years after high school, however, their children are older while later childbearers have just begun their families and have young children in the home. Thus the early childbearers were more likely to be working 10 years after high school in the Card study and at age 24 in the Hofferth et al. study.

1. Early childbearers may have a greater economic need to work. Never married mothers who had an early birth have a high likelihood of being employed (Haggstrom et al., 1981). In a related study Trussell and Abowd (1979) also found that among whites increasing age at first birth lowers the propensity to work by raising the wage required to attract them into the work-force.

There are sex differences in the association between early childbearing and employment. At 1 and 5 years out of high school more males in the adolescent childbearer group were working, compared to their classmates (Card, 1977). Thus for males, each parenthood leads to entrance into the labor force. However, by 11 years out, these differences had disappeared. By 11 years after high-school most non-parenting males had also completed their schooling and entered the work force so the difference disappears.

Females, in contrast, work less while they have young children in the home, but as their children mature, they return to work. Thus the timing of the birth affects when that hiatus will occur. By the mid twenties, the later childbearers are beginning their families and dropping out of the work-force while the early childbearers are reentering.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2020
Messages
801
Reputation
484
Some retard tried arguing against me and sent me this


From the paper:

In a study conducted in Mexico by [37] , complications during pregnancy were estimated to be at 26 percent (%) in adult women and 10 percent (%) in adolescents (p = 0.04). However, the gestational age and birth-weight were similar in both groups. The study further revealed that birth by cesarean section was more frequent among the offspring of adult women (65% compared to 48%, p = 0.015) than in adolescents.
 

Brutus

I can't breathe
Birds
Joined
Aug 25, 2015
Messages
17,539
Reputation
5,153
I want to betabuxx an 18 year old ethnic slut but I'm poor as fyck
 

reptiles

Megastar
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
9,995
Reputation
5,691
One prominent feminist goal is to reduce teen pregnancies as if that would be a good thing. The current dogma is to put females in schools (where they do not learn much if anything of value) instead of being able to become mothers early. Young teens are brainwashed into thinking it's somehow bad to be a teen parent.


On "I would encourage other teens to have children" they all strongly disagreed.

On "Having a baby changed my life for the better" they all strongly agreed.

This illustrates how strong the brainwashing has been, they do not recommend it to other people even though for all of them it improved their lives. It's possible they were virtue signaling giving the politically correct answer "no we do not encourage other teens to become pregnant".

It's not just them that had a good experience with teen pregnancy.


Motherhood can be a positive experience that makes sense in the lives of young women from disadvantaged backgrounds. To be effective, policy must recognize the valued social role motherhood provides for these young women. The negative long-term outcomes observed may largely be a result of their disadvantaged position within society and this should be the focus of interventions.

Girls from a young age often want to become mothers, taking care of babies. By supporting them we can make that dream a reality. Instead of dolls they will now take care of their own baby after carrying and giving birth. Having children early will allow for better bond between parent and child since the difference in age will be smaller, it will be more like a friendship relationship and better for everyone.

Early pregnancy reduces breast-cancer risk https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6199327/

By becoming pregnant and having children early in life you will be able to focus on your career later, wasting your most fertile years as a female just studying things at school you will rarely/never use besides to pass tests is insanity.

In most regions, the age distribution of maternal mortality follows a J-shaped curve, with a slightly increased risk of death in adolescents as compared to women between 20 and 24 years old

In addition, adolescents in some countries were found to be at lower risk of death than women in their early 20s and even than women in all other age groups

In contrast to the overall results, the MMR for 15-19 year-olds in Tanzania was the same as for women aged 20-24, and much lower than for women aged 25 and over, indicating that there is no excess risk of maternal death associated with adolescent pregnancy.


When no other factors are taken into account, children of teenage mothers have significantly higher odds of placement in certain special education classes and significantly higher occurrence of milder education problems, but when maternal education, marital status, poverty level, and race are controlled, the detrimental effects disappear and even some protective effects are observed.

Hence, the increased risk for educational problems and disabilities among children of teenage mothers is attributed not to the effect of young age but to the confounding influences of associated sociodemographic factors. In contrast to teen age, older maternal age has an adverse effect on a child's educational outcome regardless of whether other factors are controlled for or not.


The following french study had a similar result https://sci-hub.st/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19733429/

After adjustment for confounding factors, RRs (95% confidence interval) of fetal death and anaemia were respectively 1.37 (1.09-1.70) and 1.27 (1.15-1.40) for a 16-year-old compared to a 20-year-old mother. Younger mothers had significantly decreased risks of obstetric complications (preeclampsia, caesarean section, operative vaginal delivery and post-partum haemorrhage). Higher prevalence of prematurity and low birth weight in infants born to teenagers were not attributable to young maternal age after adjustment for confounding factors.

It is sometimes stated teen pregnancies would somehow be bad for the career, the reality is of course the opposite of that. By having children early you will be able to have your career later without interruption to have children.


The research suggests that the age at which childbearing begins is not as important as the length of time since the (most recent) birth in influencing whether or not a woman works. Having a young child consistently lowers labor force participation, whereas an early birth does not.

Of the three studies that have specifically addressed this issue, one (Koo and Bilsborrow, 1980) finds no effect of early childbearing while two studies find a weak positive effect of early childbearing on labor force participation (Hofferth et al., 1978; Card, 1979). In these studies early childbearers (female) appear to be somewhat more likely to be in the labor force 10 years after high school than later childbearers. This is probably due to several factors:

0. Since early childbearers start their families early, at 1 and 5 years after high school fewer early than later childbearers are working (Card, 1977). Ten years after high school, however, their children are older while later childbearers have just begun their families and have young children in the home. Thus the early childbearers were more likely to be working 10 years after high school in the Card study and at age 24 in the Hofferth et al. study.

1. Early childbearers may have a greater economic need to work. Never married mothers who had an early birth have a high likelihood of being employed (Haggstrom et al., 1981). In a related study Trussell and Abowd (1979) also found that among whites increasing age at first birth lowers the propensity to work by raising the wage required to attract them into the work-force.

There are sex differences in the association between early childbearing and employment. At 1 and 5 years out of high school more males in the adolescent childbearer group were working, compared to their classmates (Card, 1977). Thus for males, each parenthood leads to entrance into the labor force. However, by 11 years out, these differences had disappeared. By 11 years after high-school most non-parenting males had also completed their schooling and entered the work force so the difference disappears.

Females, in contrast, work less while they have young children in the home, but as their children mature, they return to work. Thus the timing of the birth affects when that hiatus will occur. By the mid twenties, the later childbearers are beginning their families and dropping out of the work-force while the early childbearers are reentering.



>>One prominent feminist goal is to reduce teen pregnancies as if that would be a good thing. The current dogma is to put females in schools (where they do not learn much if anything of value) instead of being able to become mothers early. Young teens are brainwashed into thinking it's somehow bad to be a teen parent.>>

1 It is bad for the economy because children are expensive and usually most people are making the 6 figure salaries or 5 figure salaries by the age of 25 to 30 having older parents is the ideal for the kid genetically unfornately this isn't the case sperm wears down very early and women past 30 can get menopause but that's only some.

2 You got to bear in mind most females are long term orientated when it comes to there reproduction they wanna make sure there off springs are well taken care off to combact any ''deletarious'' genes they cheat on the side but they always usually stick to 1 in the long run this system is almost flawless bar the cheating part to over come this IVF Based selection can be done this is a positive eugenics approach. We don't need teen parents out there we need workers and we need smarter people the only way currently to increase intellgence is with genetic engineering
 

baby

rope gang
Escortcels
Joined
May 13, 2021
Messages
1,706
Reputation
2,065
>>One prominent feminist goal is to reduce teen pregnancies as if that would be a good thing. The current dogma is to put females in schools (where they do not learn much if anything of value) instead of being able to become mothers early. Young teens are brainwashed into thinking it's somehow bad to be a teen parent.>>

1 It is bad for the economy because children are expensive and usually most people are making the 6 figure salaries or 5 figure salaries by the age of 25 to 30 having older parents is the ideal for the kid genetically unfornately this isn't the case sperm wears down very early and women past 30 can get menopause but that's only some.

2 You got to bear in mind most females are long term orientated when it comes to there reproduction they wanna make sure there off springs are well taken care off to combact any ''deletarious'' genes they cheat on the side but they always usually stick to 1 in the long run this system is almost flawless bar the cheating part to over come this IVF Based selection can be done this is a positive eugenics approach. We don't need teen parents out there we need workers and we need smarter people the only way currently to increase intellgence is with genetic engineering
we need to stop caring about money and start fucking young teens. money need to collapse. human race forever.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2020
Messages
801
Reputation
484
I already demonstrated in the first post how teen pregnancies are preferable over late pregnancies when it comes to the economy.

Restricting fertility is bad long-term for the economy, you end up with a few young people expected to serve all the elderly, it's like pissing in your pants, it's nice and warm at first.

@reptiles
 

cool kid on da block

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Masculinity Crew
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
70
Reputation
76
On "Having a baby changed my life for the better" they all strongly agreed.

This illustrates how strong the brainwashing has been, they do not recommend it to other people even though for all of them it improved their lives. It's possible they were virtue signaling giving the politically correct answer "no we do not encourage other teens to become pregnant".
they could just be coping and in denial when they say it makes their life better. it's difficult to admin you fucked up.
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2021
Messages
490
Reputation
604
On "I would encourage other teens to have children" they all strongly disagreed.

On "Having a baby changed my life for the better" they all strongly agreed.
 

Number 1

Joke
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
368
Reputation
247
There's little need for that. Automation will wipe at many jobs. Replacement rates are just a meme
yeah, just like how factories and automated production of goods allowed people to be neets in the wake of the industrial revolution

full automation ain't coming any time soon buddy
 

Jordan_Smith

seconde shortest man in turkey
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
916
Reputation
527
One prominent feminist goal is to reduce teen pregnancies as if that would be a good thing. The current dogma is to put females in schools (where they do not learn much if anything of value) instead of being able to become mothers early. Young teens are brainwashed into thinking it's somehow bad to be a teen parent.


On "I would encourage other teens to have children" they all strongly disagreed.

On "Having a baby changed my life for the better" they all strongly agreed.

This illustrates how strong the brainwashing has been, they do not recommend it to other people even though for all of them it improved their lives. It's possible they were virtue signaling giving the politically correct answer "no we do not encourage other teens to become pregnant".

It's not just them that had a good experience with teen pregnancy.


Motherhood can be a positive experience that makes sense in the lives of young women from disadvantaged backgrounds. To be effective, policy must recognize the valued social role motherhood provides for these young women. The negative long-term outcomes observed may largely be a result of their disadvantaged position within society and this should be the focus of interventions.

Girls from a young age often want to become mothers, taking care of babies. By supporting them we can make that dream a reality. Instead of dolls they will now take care of their own baby after carrying and giving birth. Having children early will allow for better bond between parent and child since the difference in age will be smaller, it will be more like a friendship relationship and better for everyone.

Early pregnancy reduces breast-cancer risk https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6199327/

By becoming pregnant and having children early in life you will be able to focus on your career later, wasting your most fertile years as a female just studying things at school you will rarely/never use besides to pass tests is insanity.

In most regions, the age distribution of maternal mortality follows a J-shaped curve, with a slightly increased risk of death in adolescents as compared to women between 20 and 24 years old

In addition, adolescents in some countries were found to be at lower risk of death than women in their early 20s and even than women in all other age groups

In contrast to the overall results, the MMR for 15-19 year-olds in Tanzania was the same as for women aged 20-24, and much lower than for women aged 25 and over, indicating that there is no excess risk of maternal death associated with adolescent pregnancy.


When no other factors are taken into account, children of teenage mothers have significantly higher odds of placement in certain special education classes and significantly higher occurrence of milder education problems, but when maternal education, marital status, poverty level, and race are controlled, the detrimental effects disappear and even some protective effects are observed.

Hence, the increased risk for educational problems and disabilities among children of teenage mothers is attributed not to the effect of young age but to the confounding influences of associated sociodemographic factors. In contrast to teen age, older maternal age has an adverse effect on a child's educational outcome regardless of whether other factors are controlled for or not.


The following french study had a similar result https://sci-hub.st/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19733429/

After adjustment for confounding factors, RRs (95% confidence interval) of fetal death and anaemia were respectively 1.37 (1.09-1.70) and 1.27 (1.15-1.40) for a 16-year-old compared to a 20-year-old mother. Younger mothers had significantly decreased risks of obstetric complications (preeclampsia, caesarean section, operative vaginal delivery and post-partum haemorrhage). Higher prevalence of prematurity and low birth weight in infants born to teenagers were not attributable to young maternal age after adjustment for confounding factors.

It is sometimes stated teen pregnancies would somehow be bad for the career, the reality is of course the opposite of that. By having children early you will be able to have your career later without interruption to have children.


The research suggests that the age at which childbearing begins is not as important as the length of time since the (most recent) birth in influencing whether or not a woman works. Having a young child consistently lowers labor force participation, whereas an early birth does not.

Of the three studies that have specifically addressed this issue, one (Koo and Bilsborrow, 1980) finds no effect of early childbearing while two studies find a weak positive effect of early childbearing on labor force participation (Hofferth et al., 1978; Card, 1979). In these studies early childbearers (female) appear to be somewhat more likely to be in the labor force 10 years after high school than later childbearers. This is probably due to several factors:

0. Since early childbearers start their families early, at 1 and 5 years after high school fewer early than later childbearers are working (Card, 1977). Ten years after high school, however, their children are older while later childbearers have just begun their families and have young children in the home. Thus the early childbearers were more likely to be working 10 years after high school in the Card study and at age 24 in the Hofferth et al. study.

1. Early childbearers may have a greater economic need to work. Never married mothers who had an early birth have a high likelihood of being employed (Haggstrom et al., 1981). In a related study Trussell and Abowd (1979) also found that among whites increasing age at first birth lowers the propensity to work by raising the wage required to attract them into the work-force.

There are sex differences in the association between early childbearing and employment. At 1 and 5 years out of high school more males in the adolescent childbearer group were working, compared to their classmates (Card, 1977). Thus for males, each parenthood leads to entrance into the labor force. However, by 11 years out, these differences had disappeared. By 11 years after high-school most non-parenting males had also completed their schooling and entered the work force so the difference disappears.

Females, in contrast, work less while they have young children in the home, but as their children mature, they return to work. Thus the timing of the birth affects when that hiatus will occur. By the mid twenties, the later childbearers are beginning their families and dropping out of the work-force while the early childbearers are reentering.
now this is based
 

cool kid on da block

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Masculinity Crew
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
70
Reputation
76
yeah, just like how factories and automated production of goods allowed people to be neets in the wake of the industrial revolution

full automation ain't coming any time soon buddy
never said full automation. but driving is soon gonna be widespread automated, and being a driver of some kind is one of the most common jobs, other service based jobs are next, buddy.
 

reptiles

Megastar
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
9,995
Reputation
5,691
I already demonstrated in the first post how teen pregnancies are preferable over late pregnancies when it comes to the economy.

Restricting fertility is bad long-term for the economy, you end up with a few young people expected to serve all the elderly, it's like pissing in your pants, it's nice and warm at first.

@reptiles

Restricting births until 25 makes the most sense, you lose the genetic degeneration defect with technologies like IVF, teenage parents are also more likely to abusive because there not mature enough mentally to take on such a tasks plus there making less interest that age. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4653097/

Also Old age is a phyical defect we as a society need to look into considering certain things considered normal today as being very harm full. Being low IQ is a physical defect, being ugly is a physical defect we can address the age issue 1 point at a time
 

Number 1

Joke
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
368
Reputation
247
never said full automation. but driving is soon gonna be widespread automated, and being a driver of some kind is one of the most common jobs, other service based jobs are next, buddy.
and? factor worker wasn't one of the most common jobs before?

also you are really overestimating the progress of self-driving cars
 

reptiles

Megastar
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
9,995
Reputation
5,691
There's little need for that. Automation will wipe at many jobs. Replacement rates are just a meme

The more jobs that are wiped the more fucked a LOW IQ individual is the solution here is not to regulate an automation industry quite the opposite it's to look for solutions Increasing intelligence will be the ideal perhaps through genetic engineering
 
Top