/b/ - Random

only the dead can know peace from this FUN


New Reply[×]
Name
Email
Subject
Message
Files Max 5 files32MB total
Tegaki
Password
Flag
[New Reply]


 Dress to impress!


9619b4b6617e3e69ffb2be32b0f6d088.jpg
[Hide] (94.1KB, 574x1024) Reverse
How many millions of times have people have taken their relationship far enough to have sexual intercourse, just to break up soon after or within a year? It's almost always because someone thought they were old enough to have a chance of meeting their "soul mate" (if you believe in that sort of thing). Then later the girl tells her boyfriend she had sexual intercourse already years ago and he's devastated or put off. Their relationship will probably be ruined, and that could mean they never get married and have a proper family.

I have the solution: Nobody should be allowed to be in a romantic relationship until 30. Before that it's basically impossible for one to have their life figured out. What job they'll do, where they'll live. I would have said 25, but in today's down economy nobody is really settled until 30. The problem is really that people always think they're ready when they have no idea what they're talking about. In the off chance that they in fact do hesitate for this year, next year they will say "okay! I have overcome the hurdle!" We have global CCTV and wiretapping; this shouldn't be hard to enforce.
>>324039 (OP) 
>first paragraph
Don't assume that more than 25 percent of users on an anonymous imageboard have even so much as kissed a girl, let alone had sex with one, much less had a long-term romantic/sexual relationship with one.
>Nobody should be allowed to be in a romantic relationship until 30.
That will make the current "autism epidemic" look like a joke in comparison to what you're proposing. With extra downie sprinkles.
>We have global CCTV and wiretapping; this shouldn't be hard to enforce.
How is overbearing surveillance going to influence relationships of any kind? Isn't this some Das Leben der Anderen type of shit? I ask because i haven't seen the whole movie.
Replies: >>324042
>>324040
>How is overbearing surveillance going to influence relationships of any kind?
Because then the next day they get a ticket in their mailbox.
Replies: >>324044
>>324042
What the fuck do you mean by that? A fine? A ticket to a movie?
Replies: >>324087
>>324039 (OP) 
>Nobody should be allowed to be in a romantic relationship until 30.
The emotional anti-pedo crowd supports this.
>>324045
I don't think so.
It's an absurdity on it's face.
A deep relationship often occurs in the formative years of adolescence,(or at least, did,) and attempting to "Regulate" this kind of thing is little more than the imaginings and "problem solving" of an autist.
Society needs to embrace monogamy as a virtue again, and abolish all the ((( Feminist Ideals )))  and ((( Entitlements ))) of Cock-Carousel riding whores.
You know ((( WHO ))) has to be kicked out before that can happen.

BTW, there's CP in the catalog, but the captcha won't let me report it.
Please report that filth
Replies: >>324049
>>324046
I agree with you.
>>324045
I am vehemently anti-pedo and I do not agree with OP. I would even slightly relax Romeo and Juliet clause (say, 15-20) if I were in charge, but dusty old men like me shouldn't be trying to fuck minors. I don't even care about women's rights nor do I hate women in particular, but a massive age gap definitely adds another layer of discrepancy to the dynamic. Marrying underdeveloped girls off to old men was an anomaly in the distant past as well. About 18-20 is the perfect age for a woman to bear children. Older still works too, just not for everyone. My grandmother bore my mother around 38 and both women are smarter than practically all men I have ever met in my entire life. Wanting to fuck anything younger is a significant risk to a female and trying to push that is just hedonistic. Let children be children for fuck's sake.
Replies: >>324087 >>324163
>>324039 (OP)  
This was already tried with generation y and it did not work. 
>schools preach abstinence from sex unless married
>preach do not get married until college degree and have money to take care of super expensive kids
>implying no college debt
>30+ implied if you did not have a scholarship
This was part of the 'only let smart people have kids' bit, what with how nobody can have kids if they sit there in debt for years to the point of being a virgin at 30. The average person loses their virginity at 17 so it was silly to preach it so of course it does not work.  They get people used to either being alone forever or being sluts that are not committed to marriage. 
>>324050
So you want children raised poorly?Sounds like you're a child abuser to me. 
>>324045
They did. They really really did. 
>>324044
It means a fine, as in forced to pay money every time you get caught and then it leads to jail or prison time or community service. People keep doing it, charge them more.
>>324050
>About 18-20 is the perfect age for a woman to bear children
Fucking lol
Let me put it this way guy, if you take longer to have a new generation then other people you are playing against in ethnic selection, you have already lost
Replies: >>324165
>>324163
You are fucking stupid and treat your mental illness as some sort of imperative. Rope.
Replies: >>324166
>>324165
Ain't no need to hate
lel
omegalul.jpg
[Hide] (119.9KB, 1024x683) Reverse
>>324039 (OP) 
Uhm,... no, sir. Men at 30 years or older have no sexual drive, and their dick has waned and shriveled; they couldn't even ram it down your hole properly, it would mush up for half of the time.  I will "settle down" (this doesn't mean I'm whoring, idiots, I mean stop having sex then) when I'm thirty. Probably be long married by then anyway. Until then, I need young, functional dick.
[New Reply]
Connecting...
Show Post Actions

Actions:

Captcha:

Select the solid/filled icons
- news - rules - faq -
jschan 1.7.3