For those of you who desire kids...

[wait_out]

Worth reading

How Older Parenthood Will Upend American Society

 

[Burroughs]

Its funny how older womyn need to make their problem…EVERYONE'S PROBLEM!

If a womyn choses to climb the corporate ladder and build a career good for her…but don't start whining and crying about it later because your child has an increased chance of birth defects

Its high time women learned you can't have everything….even if the media constantly lies to you and tells you you can

And if you are an older man of 45...for fvcks sake marry a 25 year old.

I read the article and deemed it irrelevant..women deeply resent the fact that men can have children into their 90s ..the article merely pandered to women...thats what media does, nothing new

aging men DON't have as much to worry about as women and they never will...

if you are too stupid to realize this that is your own problem wait up

 

[wait_out]

Burroughs, for a guy who writes so much, you sure don't read a lot

Why do older men make such unreliable sperm? Well, for one thing, unlike women, who are born with all their eggs, men start making sperm at puberty and keep doing so all their lives. Each time a gonad cell divides to make spermatozoa, that’s another chance for its DNA to make a copy error. The gonads of a man who is 40 will have divided 610 times; at 50, that number goes up to 840. For another thing, as a man ages, his DNA’s self-repair mechanisms work less well.

...“I often hear from teachers that the children of much older fathers seem more likely to have learning or social issues,” she told me. Now, she said, she’d proved that they can be. Showing that aging men have as much to worry about as aging women, she told me, is a blow for equality between the sexes. “It’s a paradigm shift,” she said.

This article is not retards at Slate or the Atlantic trolling for pageviews so try and pay some attention to it. I personally don't give a sh!t about any theoretical equality between the sexes, but a kid with a learning disability will break your heart.

Don't be ignorant fellas

 

[zekko]

My parents were quite old when they had me, and I always thought this was a big disadvantage growing up. For instance, my father was unhealthy and didn't take me out to play catch or teach me to play ball or work on cars or such. He just didn't have the energy, his job sucked everything he had out of him. Also, being older, my parents didn't live a very active lifestyle, compared to my classmates who got out more.

I think all this contributed to my social awkwardness early in life, I was painfully shy growing up. They say older parents are more prone to have autistic children. And while I was never autistic, I wonder if I didn't have some sort of chemical imbalance that hampered my ability and motivation to be social, caused by the age of my parents.

I don't mean to seem ungrateful, because my parents provided a good home for me, and they stayed together. I turned out all right in the end and I conquered my shyness. I wouldn't trade them, but sometimes I wonder what it would have been like growing up with younger, more active, robust parents.

I also read a recent article talking about how the delay in having babies is contributing to a baby shortage. There aren't enough young people to pay into social security and pensions, or to keep the economy growing as the population ages.

I liked some of the comments that article drew. Some people noted that the economy was supposed to serve the people, the people weren't supposed to be slaves serving the economy. Others pointed out that social security and medicare were pyramid schemes that were due to collapse sooner or later. Interesting stuff.

The thing I see is having children is just too damn expensive these days. The cost of family health care alone would be enough to steer me away from it. Genetically, it's best for younger folk to be having the kids. But unfortunately they are usually the least financially prepared for such a burden. And of course the government steps in to relieve some of that, but that just leads to more debt.

 

[MatureDJ]

They say older parents are more prone to have autistic children. And while I was never autistic, I wonder if I didn't have some sort of chemical imbalance that hampered my ability and motivation to be social, caused by the age of my parents.

I think that it is the autism (or near autism, whatever it's called) in the parents (especially for men) that cause them to not be able to find a mate earlier in life - hence older parents are already self-selected to have a higher incidence of autism in their genes.

 

[betheman]

its still pretty much a male shaming article, I didnt read it all, I couldnt be arsed.

she appears hell bent on proving older woman = having babies = good, older men having babies = producing defective children ergo his fault.

there may well be an increased incidence of autistic children, there are still plenty of healthy kids born to older fathers.

once I sniff a feminist agenda, my objectivity goes out the window

 

[wait_out]

I didnt read it all

That's about your only intelligent/accurate comment.

its still pretty much a male shaming article

No, it's not. And even if it was, what it's saying is still relevant.

once I sniff a feminist agenda, my objectivity goes out the window

Objectivity rests in parsing what is true and what is false within individual arguments, not cherry picking your news sources to fit your confirmation bias.

Quite honestly B, if you can't be bothered to read an article like an adult, stay the fvck out of the argument. What good does it do to show the world "I've got no ability to think critically, no patience, yet still expect my opinion to carry weight".

WTF is going wrong with all of you these days? And I'm not even asking that as a rhetorical question. Are you guys just unable to think at all without having your opinion served up in front of you on a plate by a manosphere blog? You remind me of the clones in Brave New World.

You are the sole bright spot in this thread so far Zekko

 

[3countriesPlan]

I actually dont even bother to read the arguments of idiots like the person who wrote the article (based on the comments here) because they live in some warped reality. Women always wanna blame men for everything.. its getting pretty old.

Anyways, this is all the sort of brainwashing garbage that is used to pussify men today (90% of guys are at odds with the sosuave mindset), we can't really beat them but we can go ahead and live successfully while they secretly question their views late at night by themselves while listening to Enya and mastvrbating to old episodes of Murphy Brown

 

[Burroughs]

Wait_out, are you a chick just out of interest?

Of course she's a chick

The fear tactics, the underlying shaming...its right out of the femcvnt playbook

notice how butthurt he/she gets when we dismantle feminist propaganda...only a woman or a faggot would ever get so pissed like he/she does

 

[wait_out]

You are selective readers. Proof:

The most notorious trisomy is Down syndrome... The risk that a pregnancy will yield a trisomy rises from 2–3 percent when a woman is in her twenties to 30 percent when a woman is in her forties.

Same article. The author's own child was born with a developmental fine-motor delay after the help of fertility boosters. It is common enough.

This past May, an article in the New England Journal of Medicine found that 8.3 percent of children born with the help of ART had defects, whereas, of those born without it, only 5.8 percent had defects.

There is one serious crit that you all missed, in that the author is discussing relative risks (young sperm vs. old sperm) rather than absolute risks (30% trisomy defects for women 40+). How am *I* the one seeing it if you guys are so skilled at tearing apart fem-propaganda, hmm?

The proper refutation is finding a geneticist with differing views, or a better scientific explanation.... not simply claim gender bias like you were a women's studies major . Male aging is nowhere near as risky as female, but that doesn't mean it has no consequences (without even touching the difficulties of raising a teenager at 50). How the fvck do you guys manage to turn every topic on the table into your own persecution, or male vs. female drama... what's valuable in that article is, "what's gonna happen to my sperm as I age."

If your priority when faced with information is to draw out male/female bias, rather than learn something, you are gonna miss out on a lot of information that could have made you smarter.

SL, with a 30% chance of trisomy a woman should not be having kids after 40. What's interesting about that article is that we don't discuss risks to men and solutions (ie. freezing sperm) often... if you don't think and plan, you risk getting blindsided

 

[wait_out]

For the NYT:

The overall risk to a man in his 40s or older is in the range of 2 percent, at most, and there are other contributing biological factors that are entirely unknown.

There's the absolute number. See what I mean? The problem is just when you come up on the wrong side of the odds.

More:

Most people have many of these so-called de novo mutations, which occur spontaneously at or near conception, and most of them are harmless. But studies suggest that there are several such changes that can sharply increase the risk for autism and possibly schizophrenia — and the more a child has, the more likely he or she is by chance to have one of these rare, disabling ones.

... Dr. Stefansson and other experts said that an increase in the average age of fathers had most likely led to more cases of autism. Unlike other theories proposed to explain the increase, like vaccinations, it is backed by evidence that scientists agree is solid.

This by itself hardly explains the overall increase in diagnoses, at least in the United States. The birthrate of fathers age 40 and older has increased by more than 30 percent since 1980, according to government figures, but the diagnosis rate has jumped tenfold, to 1 in 88 8-year-olds.

Finally, a smart comment from the NYT:

You are making this a men vs. women political issue issue. This is highly inappropriate. This is about the efforts to find a solution to a horrible health and life issue many families must deal with for the rest of their lives!

Pearls before swine.

 

[( . )( . )]

Wait_out, are you a chick just out of interest?

I've suspected as much, he/she's definately on the list. It usually always makes an appearance whenever there's a "men are just as amoral/hypergamous/slvtty (insert chickism)" thread. It's a tough one but for now until I get more of a tell he's just in the naive SWPL mangina camp.

Sounds like pseudo science garbage to be honest. The agenda is clear as day.

Our little Social_Leper is growing up.

 

[wait_out]

Let's just hope the odds come up in your favor if you ever start a family, then.

As for myself, I will be prepared.

Your call as to who's more naive. Cheers.

 

[betheman]

Quite honestly B, if you can't be bothered to read an article like an adult, stay the fvck out of the argument. What good does it do to show the world "I've got no ability to think critically, no patience, yet still expect my opinion to carry weight".

wind your b!tch neck in!
I cant be bothered to read something which is obviously biased and has an agenda. As for your assumption in the above quote, you just come over like a whiny b!tch

 

[wait_out]

why not do the smart thing and freeze your little fellas, if it really concerns you.

Considering it is only $600, it's accessible and could theoretically prevent your child from having a mental condition, why not? You might change your entire life for the better, for the cost of a few tanks of gas.

As for birth defects, the relative risk for a woman vs. a man after 40 years seems about roughly 15 to 1. If a woman can't measure these risks seriously but instead goes on a tirade about shaming... would any of you ever take her seriously? It's about biology not politics.

The age of the mother is the #1 factor but these epigenetic mutations (schizophrenia, autism) under study are carried on the male chromosome. THAT is what is important, and why it's useful to men who may consider having kids.

If you're too sensitive to "shaming" to tolerate the writer, go read the raw study in a medical journal.

 

[Colossus]

There are some pertinent scientific truths in that article, but unfortunately it's a little too stained with alarmism and a feminist rhetoric. I dont see why it's breaking news that people who have children at older ages are significantly more likely to produce children with developmental defects. I learned this in school years ago. As you age there are just more "copy errors" in cell replication, as well as cumulative exposure to environmental pathogens.

Since men continuously produce sperm throughout life, it makes sense that as we age out sperm will have more "copy errors" that could contribute to a birth defect. However, women are exposed to the same pathogens we are, and it's naive to think their preexisting eggs couldn't undergo some spontaneous mutations of their own.

I gotta concur with 3countries here----it gets pretty fvcking old being blamed for everything. How can you not see this??? They want professional equality, then blame us for their social failures. They want to be treated as "equals with superior privileges", then get irate when men don't want to approach them. They blame men for not finding their old, re-treaded asses attractive. They want to have their children at an older age, then cherry-pick studies to point the smoking gun at men for birth defects.

I am 100% convinced that women are born with an innate, hard-wired lack of personal accountability. I do think there are lots of great women who CAN look at themselves and sort of grow beyond this mental scaffold of passing the buck they have evolved, but they are still inclined to blame men. It's both an evolved mental mechanism they have and a schema that's reinforced by society.

But, what can you do? You can hate the game or just get better at it. If you are an older man who wants to have kids you can mitigate some of the risk by just choosing a younger woman.

 

[wait_out]

There are some pertinent scientific truths in that article, but unfortunately it's a little too stained with alarmism and a feminist rhetoric.

This is true -- but what is ultimately more important are the pertinent scientific truths, not the author's spin.

Personally, I would not want to have a kid with a woman over 35 because of the complications -- in fact I think it's quite selfish, given the risks involved with assisted-reproductive therapies and trisomy defects. There is something like a 92% abortion rate for babies diagnosed with Down's Syndrome, which is a good indication of how people feel about kids with genetic defects (source).

I think considering the consequences, the birth defect risk for 40+ male parents is worth thinking about. Because they are carried on our own genes, and you cannot mitigate those risks with a younger partner, you need to do so by reproductive timing. I am mostly pissed because people are getting excited because they "found a feminist" rather than filtering out what is important; this is chasing low-hanging fruit when what's important is a fairly new & profound discovery about our own reproductive health.

The usual MM forum anti-feminist circlejerk offends me because it's unproductive. Hypersensitivity against media bias is going to get in the way of absorbing knowledge, because you're fighting the author's existence instead of selectively filtering what points are valid and which are not. In the long run that will make you stupid. Yeah it feels good to slam an easy target with your online friends -- but what are you really learning? This point of view is not anti-woman, it is anti-knowledge. This makes it pure ideology -- calling this stuff the "red pill" is hypocrisy.

Knowledge might challenge your preconceptions in the short run but it will ultimately help you hold your frame. If a woman attacks you for being against advanced maternal age pregnancies, and you reply with solid facts and figures, what is she gonna say? "I did my research -- in return, I expect a woman with the maturity and foresight to have done hers." Game over.

If you are smarter, more informed, and more even-handed, you are going to dispatch a bad argument with a lot more authority than by getting into name calling and drama. It also gives you forewarning. My dating pool tends to be SWPL women (whatever the fcvk that means) who sink themselves into their career and fvck off kids, but advanced age parenthood is NOT attractive to me. That means I might need to look outside my demographic, maybe move somewhere more economically forgiving, who knows? Germany, Prague, tropical countries with killer surf breaks are all attractive but I want to plan to minimize fvck ups. It's not something to do overnight.

I'm surprised this is only seen as a women's issue and doesn't bear talking about.

 

[Down Low]

So I should castrate myself so wait_out will feel better? Gee, I sure want to be one of the bright spots.

I'm guessing that wait_out wants to milk the last sperm out of my sperm duct by hand -- just to be sure I won't give it to any women. After all, the sperm of any man over 30 is poison to women. Any child born of sperm of any man over 30 is defective.

What's the matter? Didn't you watch Logan's Run? Wow! It's so deep!

Moral: practice "safe sex" you dirty old man. Semen is a pathogen. The more wisdom a man acquires, the more he's wrong. The old white man is the oppressor. Girls rule -- boys suck! Blah blah blah.

 

[wait_out]

Down Low, bud, one of my best friends will be spending this Xmas in the hospital, along with his wife, trying to cope with their young daughter just being diagnosed with a life-threatening medical condition. I never, ever, want to find myself in that position.

When you get down to it, yeah, that is pretty deep and life-changing sh!t.

 

[evan12]

its still pretty much a male shaming article, I didnt read it all, I couldnt be arsed.

she appears hell bent on proving older woman = having babies = good, older men having babies = producing defective children ergo his fault.

there may well be an increased incidence of autistic children, there are still plenty of healthy kids born to older fathers.

once I sniff a feminist agenda, my objectivity goes out the window

good points , in fact a lot of what is called "scientific studies" is all done by women or by some men who want to please women , and try to justify the results to make women happy .
dont reads article written by woman because she just want to fill it by what she wish , but she do it in smart way