Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 11/15/2025 7:25:53 AM PST by Taxman
A woman in her late thirties posts a simple complaint online: “Men can have kids into their seventies. I’ve only got a few years left. That’s so unfair.”
Within hours, her mentions are a war zone. Some men sneer about “geriatric eggs.” Others write manifestos about feminism and hypergamy. A few women defend her, but the thread collapses into the same argument we’ve been having for decades.
In Britain, a thirty-four-year-old woman recently sued her ex-boyfriend, claiming he had “stolen her childbearing years.” After ten years together, he ended the relationship without fulfilling his promises of marriage and children. Now, she’s demanding enough compensation to pay for in vitro fertilization, arguing that at her age, the damage is irreversible. The story, which may or may not be apocryphal, made international headlines (New York Post, Nov. 9, 2025).
None of this is about fairness. It’s about biology.
Both scenes expose the same raw truth: the difference between men and women starts in the body. Women face a narrow reproductive window and carry the heavier cost of sex and childbearing. Men can father children for decades and are built to compete for access. That single asymmetry — who can bear life, and when — shapes everything that follows.
Feminism can deny it, but it can’t erase it. The entire struggle between men and women — resentment, rivalry, dependency, love — traces back to unyielding biological facts.
Biology and the Social Machinery
Men and women were never designed for identical roles. Men are stronger and more expendable. Women are fertile for a brief span and pay a higher price for reproduction. Left unmanaged, that imbalance leads to chaos: predation, jealousy, neglect. Civilizations that survived learned to harness male aggression into protection and tie sexual access to responsibility.
That is where social machinery began.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
A thoughtful and enlightened comment about the state of male/female relations in the 21st Century, and how we got here.
I look forward to my FReeper FRiends reactions and comments.
PS Read the entire article before you comment.
True the covenant is broken but she speaks of it as a social covenant only. The truth is its a spiritual God covenant we’ve broken, in which chaos only follows. Returning to God’s plan is the only way out of this mess.
Actually with men, don’t the chances for having a child with Down’s Syndrome go up after age 40?
We are headed for an AI / Fiancial services managed dystopia where the lifecycle is managed from in vitro fertilization to disposal as soylent green, and you will own nothing and be happy.
That’s the truth.
er... to disposal as soylent green when your social credits run out.
Dating apps, increase mobility, lead to “Lots of Fish In the Sea” syndrome. The feeling that if your partner isn’t perfect, it’s easy to move onto the next one.
In our grandparents’ world, you basically had until you finished High School to find a mate, or the pickings would get real thin.
I believe that higher risk hits even earlier at 35.
The ENTIRE article!?!
.
How UnFReeper !
A question, is it due to their older partners or them? You would have to look at rates per female partner as well. I don’t know if that has been done.
My daughter in law lived thru the train wreck of her single mother’s home and decided she wanted no part of it. She and Jeff jr have been together 8 years, married for 5 and have 2 beautiful children
I read where the risk for autism increases significantly for men 45 and over.
HombreSecreto: I believe that higher risk hits even earlier at 35.
The correlation between increasing paternal age and the likelihood of having a child with Down syndrome (trisomy 21) appears to be real - but modest. Maternal age remains the dominant driver of risk. When analyses adjust for maternal age, paternal age generally shows a smaller, independent effect. Some studies even suggest a U‑shaped pattern, with slightly higher risk in very young fathers and in fathers over 40, compared to fathers in their 20s–30s.
Empirical data indicates that around 90–95% of Down syndrome cases originate from maternal nondisjunction, while only 5–10% are paternal in origin. This imbalance suggests that defective sperm rarely succeed in fertilization compared to defective eggs.
In short, the human ovum is a stationary target - if it is defective, it's still a possible target.
The human spermatozoa are the "arrows" flying towards that target - and the MULTIPLE barriers present in the female reproductive tract act as a "Great Barrier" to defective spermatozoa.
Regards,
No it is the Women.
Finally, an article that acknowledges how much the male sex drive has steered these developments, and doesn't just blame it all on "feminism."
Congratulations!
Statistical tools allow us to "correct for" the phenomenon that older fathers generally tend to have fathered children with older mothers. But this effect can be "filtered out."
It then becomes clear that increasing maternal age is 90-95% responsible for children suffering from Down Syndrome. My post #13 sketches the reasons why older mothers are more at fault than older fathers.
Regards,
Yes, I know!
Trying to start a new FReeper trend — First, read the ENTIRE article; THEN comment!
Less fun, but more educational!
Returning to God’s plan is the only way out of this mess.
No
This is a fembot canard
Men’s sperm deterioration is statistically insignificant
It exists but it is tiny
https://youtu.be/rkJ5vYdpNqk?si=pWwLEQH5iEigmcKO
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.