Thread 519032430

Menbros, our response?

>>519032430 (OP)
Src?

>>519032430 (OP)
women have literally millions of eggs, they could very well have the same quality troughout age, it's just you still kinda have to encubate for about 9 months on average

>>519032430 (OP)
Study?

>>519032430 (OP)
nice source you got there..

>>519032614
Just trust me bro.

>>519032430 (OP)
the source is a single jeet study which runs counter to all previous findings by every other study (in actual reliable countries)

>>519032430 (OP)
Sound like a psyop so 20 somethings stop fucking and giving babies to 40 somethigns

>>519032430 (OP)
Shes hit the desperate stage.

They can cope all they want but disregarding the eggs/sperm quality over years they fail to comprehend two very important points.
The recovery of the woman's body after giving birth past a certain age will be a trainwreck.
The mental health of a kid growing with old as fuck parents is bad.

>>519032430 (OP)
It kind of makes sense. Eggs are original and do not carry a lifetime of genetic damage. Sperm is made constantly, in the numbers of millions. It seems to me that there is more of a chance that something will fuck up in the creation of sperm

>>519032430 (OP)
>>Muscle mommy
>>5'3btw
Would kill with no remorse

>>519032959
Genetic damage vs actual physical damage. You think a 40 year old egg doesn't accrue damage?

>>519032430 (OP)
63% of men have checked out of dating and more and more are checking out of society. You just know this is another attempt at pressuring men into having kids with women

>>519032808
It's a psyop which is why it's being spammed with the same twitter pictures of no substance. It's just a classic rage bait from israel

>>519032784
this. they've looked at the data every which way and controlled for everything. they've even physically seen the gradual degradation of the eggs plus the gradually declining % of eggs which can successfully attach and develop. There has been a very slight decline in sperm quality noticed with mens aging but its very very small compared to what happens to the much more complex female reproductive system.

>>519032430 (OP)
ok womber

>>519032959
but they are OLD. outside of scifi stasis pods everything ages and requires constant maintenance. and the eggs are only part of the deal. they have to be able to attache to the placenta and that all has to work perfectly or the egg will be rejected for all kinds of reasons.

>>519032430 (OP)
>women fabricating a false reality around themselves like usual
Truly the dumbest creatures. Since they are mentally incabable of physically building the reality in which they arent wrong they mentally build it

>>519032430 (OP)
You guys seriously need to train yourselves to just filter out anything a woman says. In almost every instance they are just ragebaiting so you check their profile and get funneled into their onlyfans. Yes literally all women on the Internet are whores, learn and adapt.

>>519032430 (OP)
>Source: planet retard

LOL as if the eggs didn't age. Fucking roasties.

>>519033793
I get more sexual satisfaction from "um ackshually..."ing a woman so hard that they block me than I will ever get from some nasty picture of their butthole

>>519032430 (OP)
Don't give a shit
Jesus Christ this site is full of whiney faggots talking about the most inane nothing bullshit just droning on and on and on and blah bleh blah, and I mean every board. Don't you faggots ever get tired of talking? Also every board is filled with homosexuals for some reason, seriously, at least have of 4chan is gay, might as well be an LGBT website

>>519032430 (OP)
Just look at the real world. Men in their 60s father healthy children all the time…..with women in their 20s and 30s. Women drastically struggle to have children at 40+.

Assuming this shit meme is slightly true with its deception…..sure their eggs may be good but their body cant handle growing a child. Wither way shit article by shit femanazis.

>>519032430 (OP)
Women starts with specific amount of eggs they have for their entire lifetime and over time her eggs will get old and bad.

Meanwhile male body just mass produces sperm therefore man always has fresh sperm therefore it doesn't matter that sperm gets bad faster than eggs.

Shitty argument made by women as cope.

>>519032430 (OP)
>response?
Even if egg quality remains the same, the quantity does not. Women are born with all the eggs they'll ever have, and they're all used up by ~age 40. All gone.

When men speak of "the wall", we aren't just talking about quality of eggs. Quantity is a quality all its own, and zero quantity means zero quality. THAT is the wall, and it is inescapable.

In other words: "shitty sperm is still better than zero eggs". Something is always more than nothing.

>>519032430 (OP)
sounds like made up foid cope desu

who has the image of that dumb bitch that froze her eggs and they were ALL unviable, dumb career hoe

>>519032430 (OP)
why do they just brazenly lie like this? it doesn't even matter if egg quality reduces or not, when they get older their uterus becomes poisoned and reduces in quality.

I don't even have sperm. Checkmate atheists.

> Semen analysis is the cornerstone of the evaluation of the infertile male (1,7). Numerous studies have examined the relationship between paternal age and key sperm parameters such as count, motility, concentration, and percent normal morphology (5). Overall, the results are conflicting. Many studies have reported statistically significant age-related declines in the aforementioned parameters, whereas others have reported no changes or rarely, even improvements in some parameters with age (8–16). However, these investigations were often limited in their study design, e.g., most of the studies did not include semen samples of fertile men (i.e., controls). Moreover, additional confounding factors, such as female partner age, were not accounted for in most studies. To better define the effect of paternal age on sperm parameters, Johnson et al. (17) performed a comprehensive meta-analysis using 90 studies that were published through the end of 2013. They concluded that increasing paternal age negatively affected nearly all semen analysis parameters (aside from sperm concentration). In other words, APA was associated with decreases in semen volume, total sperm count, sperm (progressive) motility, and percent sperm with normal morphology as well as an increase in DNA fragmentation (Table 1). However, the observed effect sizes were uniformly small, with the greatest changes noted in progressive motility (r = −0.200) and DNA fragmentation (r = −0.209).

Link: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10914128/

> However, the observed effect sizes were uniformly small
So this nonsense about sperm quality in older men is just roasties trying to cope and blame men.

>>519033733
this is true, look up marginal cord insertion. bad eggs means the placenta will end up attaching badly or incorrectly causing lots of complications, blood restrictions to the fetus et al

>>519034367
the issue is that older bodies do start to produce lower quality sperm. they are less strong, move slower and the genetic content becomes gradually less and less well copied.

>>519032430 (OP)
I thought we've known since the 90s that older sperm especially men 60+ was dysfunctional

>>519033373
Idk, but i love blasting milf and gilf eggs with my strong White semen

hope you are getting paid for marketing for this e-sexworker

>>519032735
it's not incorrect but implantation and most of the other processes of female fertility are optimal from around 18-25 years old. Most women can conceive without major issues until their late 30s. Few women conceive naturally after 40.

Male fertility starts declining around 35-40 in most cases. Which is why the classical wisdom of Hesiod and Aristotle was the ideal age for a woman to get married is 18 and the ideal age for a man is 35.

filthy cunt whores lying? no...

Yes, a woman's egg quality decreases with age due to factors like DNA damage and chromosomal abnormalities, with a more significant decline occurring after age 35. This decline contributes to lower fertility rates and a higher risk of miscarriage and genetic conditions.

>>519032614
Bold text makes it legit

>>519032430 (OP)
Women are born with all their eggs. They don't produce eggs over time so what they have is what they get. Men however create fresh sperm constantly out of the testes. Unused sperm is recycled so more fresh sperm can be created. This is why 70 year old men can impregnate fertile women but women at that point have gone through menopause.

>>519034612
>So this nonsense about sperm quality in older men is just roasties trying to cope
No its a legit concern that any man should take in to consideration.

>the greatest changes noted in [.. ] DNA fragmentation (r = −0.209).
And that means genetic mutations happen? That is where disorders, diseases etc start

>>519032707
Right. When it's a female, they will usually do this. "Hey, look this study says I am right about everything", "no you may not see it, in fact I won't even tell you which one I was talking about".

Rest assured if she cited a source, we would read it and realize it says the exact opposite of what the woman is saying it says.

>>519035060
>And that means genetic mutations happen?
Of course they happen but they are "uniformly small" nevertheless you dumb cunt.

>>519035060
Truly fucked up sperm commit sudoku (apoptosis) or just can't reach the goal, so it's irrelevant. The only DNA damage that matters for offspring is InDels

>>519035404
>so it's irrelevant.
not really since the more that cant make the distance or have accumulated genetic errors, the less likely you are to get a woman pregnant and the more likely you are to sire a deformed retard.

>>519035790
viable sperm COUNT, and thus total fertility, goes down, but viable sperm QUALITY, and thus genetic quality of any zygote produced, is largely unchanged.

>>519035952
>largely unchanged.
but not totally unchanged. thats all im saying. there is a reduction in quality across the board as age increases, though its much less pronounced than with the effect on women.

>>519032614
Millennials women are empty egged.

>>519032784
>the source is a single jeet study which runs counter to all previous findings by every other study (in actual reliable countries)
And the worst part is they're probably studying jeets who are all genetically damaged from being vegans and living in india.
Poo science by poo.

>>519032784
Wow I had no idea jeet males had sperm. I thought the female was born pregnant and would shit out a new jeet when touched.

>>519035218
>>519035404
No they are not. They become hardcore leftistLGBTW or hardcore rightwingcels

No, I shall not be having the roast beef.

>>519032430 (OP)
>dusty

I've only ever seen black women describe men as this, which means this dead egger's a coalburner.

>>519032430 (OP)
okay so? we dont date based on breedability anymore. we go based on looks

>>519032430 (OP)
Women stop producing eggs after 35. Men never stop producing spermatozoids till they die.

>>519036160
Is this your opinion or something actually measured
Is there a double blind study with 18 year old men with 18 year old women, vs 70 year old men with 18 year old women?

>>519032430 (OP)
I'll never be spermless. That midget will be eggless.

>>519032848
based. the bitch is coping hard. I don'0t even know who tf she is, probably some used up chadsexual whore

>>519035125
Isn't 87% a number that was being used by some political analysis firm in the UK for almost every study they put out?

>>519037778
Hold up......hold up now, what....what the fuck.
Dude, this shit isn't real right? Like this is definitely somehow fake right?

>>519032430 (OP)
>Crazy leftist women become "scientists"
>Preach retarded "scientific" research that suspiciously always proves them right about everything
It's not hard to figure out what's been happening

>>519032784
Not only that but a crucial factor is wether or not the uterus has been used.
Start having kids at 18 and you can have healthy babies at 40.
Have your first at 40? Hello autism/complications.
Have abortions and then try for a baby at 40? Miscarriage/stillbirth.

>>519032430 (OP)
They been trying to build this narrative for the last decade or so, that the quality of men's reproductivity degrades quickly the way women's does. They want to try to convince you that your sperm count is low for that all of your sperm are deformed and retarded.

It's obviously false. Don't believe any of it. They think it works because they don't believe that you can objectively test its truthfulness, but you can.

If you are a vulnerable faggot and have any anxiety about this for some reason, go get a simple cheap microscope, put your own semen sample on the slide and just look at it. The lies will be destroyed instantly.

I'm 55 and I did this the other day. Even 20 hours later, the sample was still active. I didn't see even one cell that was malformed, and I looked for a long time.

>>519032430 (OP)
But 60 year old men can still get 20 year old pussy pregnant?

>>519037833
Everytime someone posts this study its either been poorly done, like no control, or when there is a control the effect is like a thousand times less significant than the age of the mother. Like you can be mother fucking 85 and still have less of a degradation than a woman who is 32

>>519032430 (OP)
Tyrone and Mohammed’s sperm don’t term. There’s plenty for all the white bitches

>>519032430 (OP)
Nope eggs get more genetic damage as they pass through, a womans earliest eggs have the best DNA.

>>519037833
>Is this your opinion or something actually measured
its noted in several studies ive looked at in the past. its slight compared to the effect of age on female egg viability but its there. im really not sure why its such a controversial thing. age causes everything to function less well. and yes, the age of the man and woman was controlled for.

>>519038186
Not only that, but historically mid-40s was the typical time that a man would settle down and get married and start a family. Roughly when their value as a soldier starts to decline. The idea that a 20-year-old kid is going to take a wife and start a family is pretty ridiculous, historically speaking.

>>519038450
Its because its so small its irrelevant. A child from a man in his 50s and a woman in their 20s gets healthier DNA than a woman in her 30s. Its still entirely based overwhelmingly on the age of the mother. To the point that its pointless to even consider the father

Like these studies didn't control for smoking habits, drinking, or obesity. They've all been shit studies

>>519032430 (OP)
I don't have sex with women to make children, I just want to fuck them

>>519038726
There's some ambiguity here anon...

>>519038450
Have you ever asked yourself what is the exact thing that they seem to be testing? Is it activity? Is it viability? How are they actually doing the study where they are controlling for all the variables for something like viability? The best way would be a long-term study of children of Men in their 40s or 50s or even later, controlled for mother's age, upbringing, environment, nutrition, etc etc, which would be virtually impossible.

But even if they could actually pull that off it would be borderline eugenics type research and academia and media would crucify the study.

It's more likely they did some pseudoscientific shit like put a bunch of semen samples in a centrifuge and then measure some obscure presumed biomarker and then wrote a paper on it so they could grab a headline.

>>519032430 (OP)
If that shit was true egg freezing would work and rape victims would have nothing to worry about if the guy is just old enough. Report.

>>519038593
>>519038892
you're taking a position as extreme in bias as that which the pic in OP is taking. im not sure why but it doesn't really matter. on its face its irrational because there is not one human biological system that never suffers any degradation with age, and our reproductive abilities are no different. Its a lot less for guys than women about that there is no doubt. but to say its completely irrelevant is just wrong headed.

>>519038195
This is correct. There's also the more interesting theory that lab produced samples (ie largely the product of mechanical stimulation rather than natural euphoric stimulation) simply cannot reflect what happens in nature because a big part of the hormone interactions that occur during arousal cannot be replicated in a lab.

>>519039189
Of course it degrades over time from whatever you want to measure as peak. Definitely peak way later than women. Usually around 35 or so where women peak around 16.

Men also, just generally speaking, degrade very slowly compared to women. For example your grip strength might peak in your thirties but you only lose a tiny amount over the years from 30 to 70 such that your grip strength at 70 is only about a 20% loss. (Grip strength is a consistent and easy to measure analog highly correlates with overall muscle strength).

They always try to make it sound like it's a huge decline, but it's practically negligible.

>>519039189
because it is mostly irrelevant, to the point wherein, granted both parents are not genetic retards, the female's eggs are going to be the source of the problem 99% of the time.

>>519037778
Women stop producing eggs before they are born.

>>519039525
>They always try to make it sound like it's a huge decline, but it's practically negligible.
certainly OPs pic does that. from what i remember reading some studies a while back because of threads like this one, they dont do that in the studies themselves. trust media to do that though

>>519039557
i couldn't say its 99% of the time nor that its mostly irrelevant.

>>519039557
Correct. The studies believe they are dispelling a myth that nobody believed anyway lol

A man would have to be approaching his 70s before it would even start to register at the same level of risk as a woman who reached 30 (or even late 20s if you're being honest).

>>519039909
probably because you're a woman and you spend your entire life deflecting responsibility for anything, even shit out of your control

but is it really out of your control if you decide to have kids at a later age, just because men can do it safely?

>>519039909
>trust media
They do this kind of destructive shit to bolster feminism for population decline because it's a doomed ideology that avoids self-replication.

>>519040178
Nah bro, don't you understand if middle-aged women cope hard enough they can alter time and space?

>>519038593
>To the point that its pointless to even consider the father
They concern themself with some tiny percentage drop in sperm quality, while
there are men in their 90s who fathered children. Their clock is ticking louder
and louder, and so they are pushing more and more of this bullshit because
women can never accept responsibility for a problem, and always look to pin
it on someone else.

>>519040178
like i said, you're taking a position as biased and irrational as that of OPs posted article.

>>519040250
no doubt. its completely ridiculous to deny the dramatic effect of aging on female fertility.

>>519040356
ironically I dont hate women. I love women, I love my girls, I just cant stand to see how much the media tries to mislead them, and unfortunately they are easily misled.

>>519032430 (OP)
Older sperm creates babies who have longer telomeres and therefore longer life expectancies. It's a cool biological trick.

>>519032430 (OP)
Doesn't matter since western women aren't relationship compatible.

>>519040546
>biased
How, because I'm a guy? Anyone discussing this will either be a man or a woman; there's no truly neutral stance here, so we must live by anecdotes, either hers or his and that's reality.

>irrational
Not so fast, since data collation is really just a collection of anecdotes, under the clinical title of "study" I will add my own. I'm just about 50 myself and my wife and I had kids when she was 30, (about 10 years ago) meaning I was roughly 40 when we began. Only the last child had any sort of complication, but it was fortunately minor and she was birthed healthy and was only an issue with the placenta. That's 3 examples for each child. Pregnancy only became more dangerous as she got older and it was never because of my sperm. The kids are all highly intelligent, walking and talking well before 1 year old, no 'tism or physical disabilities.

Don't overuse the bias claim too much either, it just makes you sound like you're struggling to accept the obvious.

>>519040546
>>519040550
I'll tell you something that I've observed in the women that I know friends family and acquaintances:

Birth control basically takes away the natural desire "baby crazy" type mania that was very common when I was younger (and something that we had to be careful about as young men because almost every woman in her twenties was trying to get pregnant one way or another - almost alien today but it's true).

As women start aging out of the dating pool they begin to question why they're taking birth control when they're not even having sex so they get off of it often times in their mid to late thirties or early forties and then suddenly the baby crazy comes back like Thor's hammer and hits them straight in the fucking face and they lose their goddamn minds because the finally have regained their motherly instinct - sometimes have never even felt it before since they start some of these women as early as 10 or 11.

I've even heard them trying to explain to me what's going on in their brain when they hear a baby crying after they stop taking birth control, they say they can even fill the chemicals being released in their body almost like a drug.

Women cannot escape the fact that for them 35 and over is considered geriatric pregnancy, aka advanced maternal age.

A lot of aging, childless men desperately coping itt...

>>519041100
this makes sense. There must be a psychological effect of birth control. Messing with hormones often does...

>>519041168
project harder cat lady

>>519040949
im glad your kids are fine but you were only 40 at the time. thats perfectly fine for guys because the degradation of sperm hits slower and later.

>>519041100
im sure theres a lot of truth to that. the pill is bad news.

>>519032430 (OP)
I don't want children anyway.

I don't think that the health risks that ever come from a woman having children older ever stemmed from her "egg quality". The quality of the eggs remain stagnant, until they run out.
It's the body holding them that gets worse and results in a higher risk for the child. An 85 year old man knocking up a 25 year old woman has lower health risks for the child than a couple both aged 35.
Everyone already knew that older man = more risk, but the problem is the risk is so negligible and pales in comparison to age of the mother that it's hardly even worth thinking about.
"Drop in quality" can mean that instead of, for the sake of argument and quantification, let's say a man is at "100% quality" at age 20, he drops to 99.92% at age 35. It's an infinitesimal amount, but an amount no one ever denied the mere existence of.

>>519041118
The worst thing is when they compare it to men. They act as though the negligibly marginal impact a man's age has on the health risks of the child is the same as theirs, simply because the impact exists at all.
It's no different than saying "Well you stole $1 and I stole $1,000,000, but we both stole so there's absolutely zero difference between the two of us at all! We're the exact same!!!!"
It makes them bitter because "conventional wisdom" tells women to forgo the first 17 of their 22 child bearing years before geriatric pregnancy to find a man.
Let's say reasonably that a girl is able to have children generally at the age of 13 (though of course it could be earlier). Here's what society tells them to do over the course of their lives from that age until 35:
>13-17, still a child, don't do it
>18-22, still too young, gotta go to college, don't do it
>22-26, you're "finding yourself", you're establishing yourself in your career, you don't even know what you do and don't like, maybe at the tail end closer to 26 if you find the PERFECT man you can go for it, but otherwise, don't do it
>27-30, you can if you happen to find the perfect man at around 27, date him for a couple/few years, then marry him, go for it! but otherwise, no rush, travel, have fun, find yourself, you got time!
>31+, RED ALERT, FIND A MAN NOW AFTER YEARS OF WHORING AROUND, GO FIND ONE NOW BECAUSE AFTER 35 YOU MIGHT AS WELL ADOPT, YOU HAVE 4-5 YEARS TO FIND THE PERFECT MAN, DATE HIM FOR A MINIMUM OF 3 YEARS, MARRY HIM, THEN MAYBE POP OUT ONE KID BEFORE 35 IF YOU'RE LUCKY, GO FAST GO GO GO RIGHT NOW OR GIVE UP FOREVER
We tell young women at 18 to not even think about having children for the first 12 of their 17 adult-childbearing-pre geriatric pregnancy years, then they scramble at 30+ or give up forever.
This makes them bitter because it forces them to realize that men and women live different lives. Men don't have as much of a dire rush as they do and it pisses them off.

>>519033627
Low sperm quality also has the benefit of self filtering by failing to induce pregnancy. Meanwhile the potato babies only have a ratchet womb to grow in.

the people who did the study misunderstood the entire premise of "the wall" or "the clock". it's always been about the number of eggs a woman has in proportion to her age. I don't think I've seen even one comment ever about egg quality. It's egg count.

>>519044214
Yes the comparison is terrible because it assumes eggs and sperms are the same. In reality nature is doing an A/B test with each gender using a different strategy to optimize genetic stability of offspring while maintaining a good search rate for the next best genetic fit to the environment. Women get all their eggs at once and "freeze" or try to preserve the genetic quality, while men make copies with some mutations trying to find the next great thing, and combined we have 2 sets of genes do that one failed code doesn't destroy the organism, and a good code enhanced it. It's a balanced algorithm but women and these jokes are just too stupid to understand God's design

>>519044494
Not to mention "the wall" is called the wall because it's a fucking brick wall you can't avoid that stops you permanently and there's no getting around it.
A man having a negligible drop in "sperm quality" over the course of 80 years is in no way comparable to a woman being rendered 100% infertile not even halfway through her life, and medically considered "geriatric" at 35.

>>519044302
>by failing to induce pregnancy.
that would assume theres no genetic degradation though. thats not the case.

>>519037417
They get pregnant like turtles. They go visit the beach for their morning squat and the male jeet poop infesting the air lays on her skin before being absorbed throughout the day. That's how jeets are made. They'll stop having babies if they use toilets.

>>519045037
Wait, turtles fuck. I'm also retarded.

>>519032430 (OP)
Nepaltranny, your dilator?

>>519032430 (OP)
But is there any science behind it.. or is it all gibberish from coping elderly woman?

>>519032430 (OP)
The pathetic seething born out of objective despair is really funny to witness lmao
Anyway, 2D > 3DPD for all of eternity

>>519044957
It's not assuming that. It's surviorship bias, as degradation more likely fails to induce pregnancy and viable offspring. The degradation is baked in as a natural consequence of searching genetic code space. Sperm is made on demand and every copy introduced more. Women are the ones who minimize it , they get all the eggs at the start and no copying until they have a daughter. Delaying pregnancy introduces wider drift from that mean across generations as they too get mutations for other reasons. The point is nature is using two strategies as part of the search function, and once again women are fooled into thinking that acting like the man somehow will be better and without consequences. Enjoy the cabbage patch kid

>>519045204
It's intentionally misleading. Men's sperm does "drop in quality" over age, but the impact it has is ridiculously negligible. The difference in quality of a man's sperm at 20 and at 70 is still negligible, especially when it comes to how it impacts the health risks of the child. No one ever denied this existed, everyone just acknowledged that it didn't matter because it was such a ludicrously low impact.
The misleading part is the "egg quality", as though the quality of the egg itself ever came into question. Women's eggs, in a vacuum, stay pretty much the same over time. But the problem is not the egg itself, it's the fact that the woman's body holding the egg becomes less and less able to grow a healthy child free of defects over time.
So while this statement may be objectively true, it's intentionally misleading and nowhere near the "GOTCHA!" they think it is.
It's meant to make you try to think "HA! A 30 year old man is WAY TOO OLD to have kids!" when in reality it'd be 100x better for a 90 year old man to knock up a 25 year old woman than it would be for a 35 year old man to knock up a 35 year old woman.

>>519032614
it is not new science. sperm is made constantly so the health of a man determines the health of the sperm.young men are healthier in general but that is not to say you cannot be 30,40 or 50 and have good sperm. but if you drink, smoke and eat tacobell then your jizz is a waste.

>>519033435
they can always charm a nafri when in need

>>519045204
It's gibberish that makes no sense considering how metabolism works and why we age in the first place. Unless they found out some fundamental secret about how we age, it's crap. The fact that the data disagrees is empirical confirmation, but it should be a second-order consideration.

>>519032430 (OP)
Ok, I will get a cat... And a dog. They are cheaper anyway.

>>519045646
>Women's eggs, in a vacuum, stay pretty much the same over time.
This is not true. Womens eggs have the ability to repair DNA damage but this ability diminishes with age.
But they don’t talk about that either. This whole sperm quality cope is just a way to avoid responsibility for their ticking clock and pin the blame on somebody else.

>>519032430 (OP)
Shotabros... stocks are going up

>>519045037
Holy shit, dude, I can imagine and smell your post.

>>519032430 (OP)
This is like when people kept insisting that wine was healthy to drink because of trace amounts of resveratrol

>>519032430 (OP)
That is definitely not how it works, source?

>>519032430 (OP)
I wasn't aware the egg quality was ever supposedly the problem. I thought it was a woman's aging body not being able to nourish a genetically healthy fetus for 9 months. Women do know that they're the ones who carry and develop the child, right?

>>519046078
>Pretty much
That's the point of the qualifier. There is also some mutation but it will happen far less than sperm still (which is why men also make 10s of millions of them, it only needs one)

>>519032784
you never know, it may be true for jeets and everyone ages fine

>>519032430 (OP)
no, i think i'll prefer a woman younger than you

>>519032959
>It kind of makes sense.
Eggs carry a lifetime of decay, eggs fail not because of replication errors, but because the division mechanism on it decays with time, hence Chromosomic anomalies cannot (biologically speaking) be on the sperm side. If your son is a downie, is because you decided to fuck a post wall roastie. Likewise, since women have a fixed count of eggs, genetic anomalies are mostly on the men side, but not because of the age of the men, but because we replace sperm our whole life and human beings (not only men) genetic replication safeguards tends to become less accurate with age.

>>519032851
>The mental health of a kid growing with old as fuck parents is bad.
This, to me, should be a much bigger consideration than it is.

I was adopted by my grandmother, with my great uncle acting as a sort of father figure. I'm appreciative of them, but it also sucked not having normal parents who could be physically fully active when I was young. Then when you get into your 20s you're less able to start your own life because you spend all your time worrying about their health and helping them with day to day tasks.
The only advantage is an early inheritance, but there's a good chance you won't even be able to afford the taxes.

>>519034765
>I thought we've known since the 90s that older sperm especially men 60+ was dysfunctional
That's bullshit.

>>519032430 (OP)
Hahahaha, go talk to an IVF doctor and let me know how that goes. There is something called Advanced Maternal Age

>>519032430 (OP)
>latest broscience cope invented by circlejerking basic bitches over in weimerica to make themselves feel clever
So what else is now?