/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12795343
yeah that source is BS the data is not there
probably jsut made up by some pedo or amybe not, tere are a lot more papers about th subject i think i once looked it up and found it but it mght be a false memory

>>12795343
imagine telling a 21 year old that men find her as attractive as a 12 year old lmao

>>12795343
This study was probably financed by some pedo lmao

Shit hits the fan hard for women after 30 btw, that's how I know that chart is just pedo talk

>>12795437
not what the graph say. y axis is % of the population men would bang on average, e would bang almost all 15yo cunnies but no so many 21os

>>12795445
>Shit hits the fan hard for women after 30 btw,
idk for anglos it really is arounf 15 hat they stat going downhill. see the actress of stranger things

>>12795445
Enjoy your old roasties
>>12795451
Was she ever attractive?

>>12795343
I did some searching, skimmed through some papers and found this paper: "Ratings of Physical Attractiveness as a Function of Age". It seems to have data reminiscent to your image, just way more coarse. I don't know if your data is legit or not, but it seems that you at least shouldn't discard it outright.

>>12795343
It's probably right in terms of ranking of the ages but the percentages at the end clearly aren't accurate. I get most women age like milk but there is clearly more than 2-3% of early 40s that are absolute milf material

>>12795515
maybe to your blind, tasteless, dog fucking ass

>>12795464
Congrats, you are a pedo
>>12795451
Maybe I should've been more specific: women WITHOUT kids beyond the age of 30 get old really fast and really bad.

>>12795511
Men seem to stay attractive far better. There's some hope for wizards after all.

>>12795464
>Was she ever attractive?
no but she looks old as fuck at 18 now

>>12795511
>>12795534
Not a good study. They only look at models. Jennifer Aniston is not your typical 50 year old woman, and even she hit the wall.

>>12795567
Model is the word used to describe the subject of a photograph. The models in that study were mostly random people from the university, staff and students.

>>12795652
Either post the study, or stop making shit up.

>>12795663
What the fuck is your problem, retard? I posted the name of the study earlier, which should be enough even for a brainlet such as yourself, if you actually wanted to read it. Instead you make a retard comment misunderstanding the meaning of the word "model", and I kindly corrected you. And you respond to that with "stop making shit up"? Go gas yourself, faggot.

>>12795343
Yeah that study is a bogus source for a fake graph.
The actual hypothesis behind the image, that men find girls most attractive in their early teenage years, wouldn't be a difficult one to test.
All you'd need to do is to have a rotating selection of headshots from women of various ages, which are not revealed to the participants, and have the participants rate each girl on a scale of attractiveness.

>>12795720
>What the fuck is your problem
My problem is that you claim to have found a study, opened it up, took pictures of it, and posted the pictures, and then thought the proper thing to do was copy and paste the title of the study, and not the fucking link you found? As far as I'm concerned, you're making it up. Either post the link or stop making shit up, simple as.

>>12795751
Had you asked for it like a decent human, I would have posted it. Since you acted like an asshole, you'll just have to go by the title. Learn to behave or find your own fucking links. Simple as.

>>12795751
Dude you just had to say
>Sauce?

>>12795760
>i'm going to withhold information unless people ask for it
>you're an asshole if you call it out
The only plausible reasons I can think of for you to hide the information by only posting the title is
>1. The journal it's posted in is actual garbage
>2. You're a literal retard who thinks posting titles is better than posting links
And if it's 2., where you're a retard, I have no reason to believe you're understanding the study correctly. Whereas if it's 1., then I have no reason to trust the study.

So, in conclusion, you're making shit up. Simple as.

>>12795529
Congrats for your valuable input GILF fapper.

>>12795534
If they could get women before maybe. Women get to choose anyway

>>12795789
OP didn't even post the source, it's just made up cope.

>>12795771
Here's the link. aHR0cHM6Ly9zY2ktaHViLmRvLzEwLjEwODAvMDAyMjQ1NDUuMTk4NS45OTIyODY4Cg==

>>12795829
Actually a pretty good read

>>12795343
i want to screw girls

>>12795343
Milfbros...... how will we recover when the cunnychads are this superior?

The chart is bollocks.

Women are most attractive in the 35-45 range courtesy if their experience, careers, and maturity.

>>12795445
There was no study, shit's made up.

>>12795511
>It seems to have data reminiscent to your image, just way more coarse.
Thanks for posting this. Yeah, this is what real data looks like. The OP graph I posted is too smooth to be real data. Reading your study, it seems each age bracket only consists of 3 people. This makes it very sensitive to a bracket having only ugly people by chance (as seems to be the case for 30-39, for example).
>I don't know if your data is legit or not, but it seems that you at least shouldn't discard it outright.
I suspect the data is bogus. But I don't discard the idea behind it, in that peak female attractiveness probably is before 18. There are many other indicators that this is the case. I doubt that the peak is 13-14 though, or that 11-year-olds are as sexually attractive as 29-year-olds on average. (Oddly, your source also has 10-14 as the peak...) Which is why it would be interesting to see real data.

>>12795343
It make sense back in the day we used to marry young girls

14 y.o. have the peak female body, many having already fully developed physically so it's all downhill from there. Their mentality is mostly early teenager though, no doubt about that, and I guess that's why some zealous countries like the US love the idea of a strict and very high legal age such as 18.

>>12795434
If this graph were from the UK I would absolutely believe it. Our females are ugly as fuck, and those ugly genes really start to kick in around 17-18

>>12796943
Wonder who could be behind this post.

>>12796991
It's 18 in only a handful of states.

>>12798366
Every map of age of consent by state I see is different.

>>12798407
Find one that shows all 50 states plus DC and territories have an age of consent of 18.

>>12798418
I know plenty have 17 or 16, it just seems like a random draw for each map. Though as far as I know even in states where the age of consent is under 18 people are at most only allowed to fuck someone that's underage if they're either also underage or within just a few years. Unfortunately the age of consent isn't really what it says on the tin.

>>12795434
>pedo
Let me guess. You are an american and you are not aware of the fact there are countries with AOC set on 14-15 yo. God I hate americans so fucking god fucking damn much.

>>12798366
westoids are pure soi confirmed

>>12798499
There are also countries without functioning sewer systems but that doesn't mean I want to go shit in the street.

>>12795343
OP literally declaring he's both a faggot and a pedo

>>12795343
Was this poll anonymous or something?
I feel like I'm the odd one out because although I am very attracted to women I am only genuinely/truly attracted to women around my age group with very little variance and I get annoyed seeing pictures of women that aren't my age group all over the internet it makes me angry and I don't want to see it but everybody is a weirdo I guess.

>>12796966
>it would be interesting to see real data.
Here is some more data, from Facial, Olfactory, and Vocal Cues to Female Reproductive Value, 2013. Young women (11-15) were rated higher than adult women (19-30) in facial attractiveness and femininity, by a group of 150 males aged 18-40. The difference isn't very big, less than one SD. The pool of women was larger, 121 in total, with 12 of each age bracket selected randomly for each rater, so less risk of consistently having a set of very ugly/beautiful people skewing the results like the other study.

>>12799301
There is no source, so the polling method is unknown. The most likely case is that the data is fabricated.

>>12799335
>There is no source, so the polling method is unknown
Take your own advice, pseud.
No source for your image, so we can ceremoniously discard it, faggot.

>>12795343
>women who lost their virginity in high school will find this chart shocking and disgusting
women were a mistake lads

>>12798499
OK, pedo

that graph is BS

>>12798366
in my country the age of consent is >14yo

the proof is in our laws. we wouldn't have age of consents if 13 year olds weren't so hot.

>>12799464
>No source for your image
The source is both in the post and in the image. Hint, try to looking at the part where it says "Source:"

>>12799520
I'm not going to manually type that. Probably a fake URL. I can do it too, watch. Pajeets are homosexuals twice as often as whites. Source: Olson, Connolly (2014).

>>12795343
Epstein funded a lot of research.

>>12799520
>>12799531
here you go

might be an unpopular opinion and I fully support age of consent laws to protect girls but....Age of consent is a real social construct. In the wild wild animal kingdom, Young females who are menstruating are the most sort after for mating. It's completely natural.
Being attracted to females who are not menstruating yet (children) is not natural and for the record, this is what pedophilia actually is. Attraction to teenagers is a different thing

>>12798347
i completely agree that alot of htem age like milk this post is mine>>12795451 but also i dont really agree your women (at least the true anglos, not the british larpers) are ugly at all, it's the celts/picts/etc that are trash
>>12798499
i am from argentina, retard. liking 30% of 11yos is literally being a pedo i also hate americans who think fucking 15yos or even 17yos makes you a pedo

>>12800163
>i also hate americans who think fucking 15yos or even 17yos makes you a pedo

But its true... and its the law.

>>12799830
That may be an unpopular opinion, but it's the correct one.
There's a huge fucking difference between wanting to fuck a nine year old girl and thinking a fifteen year old is pretty.

>>12795343
Considering the popularity of Piper Perri i believe this meme graph

>>12800442
tuth!=law

>>12795343
I just realized that whoever made this didn't even bother to change default chart style in Excel. Pedos are so desperate to normalize their perversion yet they are this lazy.

>>12795343
>"Sexual arousal and arousability to pedophilic stimuli in a community sample of normal men", GCN Hall, R Hirschman, LL Oliver - Behavior Therapy, 1995 - Elsevier.
always found interesting how they measure "arousal"

>>12802153
In the study you're referring to, they measured it by the size of your peepee. If it gets bigger, you're getting aroused.

>>12802447
So I'm aroused by waking up? Garbage take. Erections also serve a function of blocking urination.

>>12802459
>So I'm aroused by waking up?
Are you not?

>>12802471
Only if I'm waking up next to your mom.

does anyone find shady that LL Oliver is a Loli Lover anagram?

>>12802477
You're missing an o.

>>12799187
>americans are comparing AOC laws passed by feminsts to cuck them with sewer systems
The cope is really getting advanced

>>12802483
it's a big O