What I am seriously thinking, however, is that we have here a really good illustration for the impossibility of serious discourse between men and women. I also think that the docuмented conversation serves as a microscope of what is going in generally in society. Public discourse is very strained at present. A big part of it is censorship and the so called cancel culture. These phenomena occur because certain ideas are deemed too inappropriate to be expressed. Look, i think we would all agree that censorship should exist and be applied to lunatics who wish to corrupt others in immorality. But we are at a stage now at which it is currently impossible for a man to say in public that he wouldn't be comfortable with his daughter dating a black man.

I notice that so often the shouting down of people who speak their views in public, is in fact done by women and usually because of how these opinions make them feel. Whereas for men the issue is not one of sentiment, but rather purpose. It seems like the sexes are simply not on the same page.

"But I'mmmmmmm not like the other girls, I'm based and not a feminist, you're being extremeeeeeee"

I don't even know what based means.  Saying "I'm based"  is not even a complete sentence.  I'll look it up.

I'm not going to opine on this topic in any other way than recognising that we should respect what the Church teaches us through Tradition.

As an aside however, I think this thread demonstrates fantastically why male-female discourse is just not really something that works.

When I look at the thread, I see a bunch of men saying something that they believe rightly or wrongly, giving their reasons for it, etc... But then in many instances the women posting are not really engaging in the conversation. They are generally responding with complaints about how they mens' comments make them feel. In one instance one lady, I believe asked the moderator to censor this thread.

I am not criticising mens' bluntness in stating their desires, nor am I criticising womens' sensibility- God created both. What I am seriously thinking, however, is that we have here a really good illustration for the impossibility of serious discourse between men and women. I also think that the docuмented conversation serves as a microscope of what is going in generally in society. Public discourse is very strained at present. A big part of it is censorship and the so called cancel culture. These phenomena occur because certain ideas are deemed too inappropriate to be expressed. Look, i think we would all agree that censorship should exist and be applied to lunatics who wish to corrupt others in immorality. But we are at a stage now at which it is currently impossible for a man to say in public that he wouldn't be comfortable with his daughter dating a black man.

I notice that so often the shouting down of people who speak their views in public, is in fact done by women and usually because of how these opinions make them feel. Whereas for men the issue is not one of sentiment, but rather purpose. It seems like the sexes are simply not on the same page.

Anyway, food for thought.

Menarche isn't peak fertility though. That's like arguing that a 13 year old boy is in his prime and ready to breed because he's capable of ejaculation.

Menarche may make pregnancy possible (in fact - it's always possible; there have been cases of very young girls getting pregnant), it doesn't mean that pregnancy is at its most likely or safest. Fertility continues to increase for several years after that, while the risks of pregnancy complications go down. According to the below, it would seem that fertility actually reaches its peak around 18 (and that doesn't mean it immediately starts falling from there).

I really just don't get the obsession some of you have with age. Are younger women generally more attractive and fertile? Yes. But statements like "a man always prefers the younger woman" (right, because with each passing day after her mid-teens, a woman progressively shrivels up, to the extent that even the prettiest 25 year old is like a hag compared to a plain 15 year old? Humans don't age that fast!) or that a 22 year old is 10 years past the "flower of her age" are wildly extreme and also factually incorrect.

The point that girls in their mid-teens are in fact women and eligible for marriage according to Canon Law and biology has been demonstrated. I think the issue people are having is not with that statement, but with the continual focus and fixation on the youngest women possible. It doesn't come across well.

We could even make this objective and compile a list of actresses or other public women we could easily compare across ages. I guarantee I could show that, besides little to no decline in fertility, there is little to no decline in appearance until the late-20s, and that an obsession with teenagers' apparent superiority to 20somethings is wholly misplaced.

I never said menarche was peak fertility. Peak is late teens and early 20s. I'm saying that the the flower of age isn't 20+ when she is at the end of her peak. So recommending girls to marry after 20 is contrary to scripture. Not the ideal time, but could also be worse

Celebrities get work done and are hyper focused on their appearance, yet many of them still look terrible because they go too far. Plus stress from their lives and usually drugs etc.

Have any of you seen this before? The same girl from age 1-18.

When does she start looking like a woman rather than a child?

Last image middle row. Also hair style and camera angle/lens/lighting is a factor.

You can see a big difference from 9 to 10. Then 11 is slightly more mature with 12 being more so.

Also others online suspect this girl lost her virginity at 14 based on her facial expression and the look in her eyes. The 15 is very different from 14. If this is true it wouldn't be surprising as a large percentage of secular women waste their virginity at 14.