Anglin has stated women should be married off at that age. I feel comfortable confirming that without a direct quote.

Yeah cause he wants to lay pipe in 14 year olds

His point is women need to be married off to start having kids once they are fertile. That's a different thing than hedonistic sex. But, I've engaged with this discussion as much as it made sense to.

Every single retard who has made the "marriage (for the purpose of procreation (sex)) ASAP" has made it abundantly clear time and time again that the actually have no idea how fertility works but yeah I'm sure it's different this time because the guy saying it hates jews enough or whatever

An age of consent of 16 seems reasonable for me policy-wise. People are uncomfortable with anything lower these days. I would ask once a woman hits high school and the breasts fill out, what magically changes between 14 and 16 and 16 to 18 to make the idea of courtship and marriage tenable. But 16 is a reasonable compromise, if nothing else to stop the bullshit "pedo" retorts. Of course, in this Jewed out Satanic hellhole, the entire discussion of lowering the age of consent would not be had with good intent, so I wouldn't support lowering it without getting rid of the Jews. (My understanding, without looking it up, is it would not need to be lowered at all to reach 16 in many cases, both here and abroad, but I don't care to look it up.) The whole "you're a pedophile" thing for being attracted to a sexually mature female is retarded. It could hardly be argued if more women were becoming committed wives at 14 and starting to have kids, we would not, in fact, get more children being born. The whole stigma just conveniently happens to result in fewer children being born. The "you want to fuck kids" line is just making a cheap shot with ill intent about a discussion that deserves to be had about why "we" decided having kids in the prime of fertility was a bad idea.

Your entire argument is "I want to fuck 14 year olds" thinly veiled by a haphazard argument about "well ackshually its da jooz". None of you fucking niggers leave the house anyway so the point is moot. The age of consent could be 4 years old and you fuckin creeps would be bloviating about how it's too high and newborns are actually the truly fertile ones. You want to lay pipe in kids because anyone beyond the age of 14 understands that you're the dude they refer to when the adults say "stranger danger". It's the same rehashed argument every single time too. "ackshually uhhh back when in the 1500s there were this and that so we should do that again #tradlife" fuckin kill yourself

"I definitely don't want to fuck kids, man. I'm just publicly advocating for fucking kids because I think it's a reasonable policy to have. I don't want to fuck the kids, I just think we have to. It's called common sense."

"Honestly it's just kinda weird that you think I'm a pedophile for insistently advocating for a reasonable and level-headed policy change that lets me fuck kids. I wouldn't fuck little girls for pleasure, it would purely be for procreation, which is fine."

@DailyStormerDigest@poa.st @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @doctorsex@nicecrew.digital I'm getting tired of tame shit like this getting lumped in with pedophilia. It's like everyone on the fediverse wants young women to have as much time as possible to be corrupted before they reach the magic age daddy government told us we have to wait for to engage in what we were designed to engage in.

How would getting rid of/ lowering the age of consent alleviate "corruption"

@doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st You mean to tell me you're on this part of the fediverse and you're not familiar with how young women get corrupted?

My understanding is through mass media and improper social and economic incentives/disincentives. I don't see some clear throughline where abolishing the age of consent fixes either of those problems.

"Young marriage would fix this issue" Young marriage is already possible through romeo and juliet laws. People don't do it though because from an economic perspective there are pretty much only negatives for it (the career prospects of a 16-18 year old are simply not conducive to family formation). Becauase this is something that is already possible but not engaged in because of economic disincentives and lack of proper social motivation, it makes no sense that just getting rid of age of consent laws would solve the issue. Because the removal of the age of consent is completely irrelevant to the actual issue, the only other reasonable explanation for someone discussing wanting to remove it or lower it is because they want access to pubescent girls.

@doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st I'm not talking strictly about age of consent, I'm talking about the fact that age of consent by extension has put stigma on simply being with someone that age so people don't do it. It's an important thing to note but you can't talk about it even on here without retards throwing the word "pedophile" around like it's going out of style.

Then maybe pedophiles should stop clamoring to lower the age of consent. This has nothing to do with "corruption." That argument leads straight to child brides. After all, "haven't you seen how 10 year olds act these days? You gotta marry them off younger to save them from corruption!"

@Myles@poa.st @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st I wouldn't go that low, but marrying them off younger would unironically help protect them from the degeneracy that is this society.

"I wouldn't go that low, but I wouldn't be interested in preventing people who want to" And how does it prevent that? You still haven't even tried explaining that at all.

@doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st @Myles@poa.st Because it's self-explanatory. You don't understand the concept of a man in a woman's life preventing her from whoring around? It's not a magic spell, but there's no denying it makes a massive difference.

@doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st @Myles@poa.st What do you mean now what? Romeo and Juliet laws only go like 2 years out. They're nice to have, but they're inconsequential.

You say you think 16 year olds should be able to marry. They can. What's inconsequential about it?

@doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st @Myles@poa.st You're in bad faith. You have one more shot.

I genuinely don't understand what the issue is. Romeo and juliet laws allow 16 year olds to get married. You say you would like 16 year olds to be able to get married. Is it the fact that they're laws that you have an issue with?

Japan has a age of consent of 16 and their birthrates are plummeting faster than a kamikaze at a destroyer.

@matty@nicecrew.digital @transgrammaractivist@mugicha.club @doctorsex@nicecrew.digital @DailyStormerDigest@poa.st Here, you dropped this.