Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
Topics (22) All
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
68Opinion
Yes. The last deadline would be menopause.
And after 35 the risks regarding pregnancy ans birth skyrocket, so its advised to get pregnant while you are young.
women don't have to worry about deadlines. Women can have kids before 35 or 40 if she wants. Only men have to sit there, wait and beg for any young woman to pay attention to him , as he turns old and ugly, and sperm quality deteriorates. Which is gonna make his chances of having kids , slimmer by the year.
It’s not advised for us to get pregnant while we are young. Women are advised to get pregnant when they are financially and mentally stable. Women are actually bashed if we get pregnant too young. And plenty of women have healthy kids after 35 wtf? You’re a weirdo.
@Aphrodite801 My mom actually had me at 37 and my bro at 40. We turned out just fine. None of us were autistic etc. I think some women are just blessed with good fertility. I know some women who had kids at 44 too. You can never tell which women have such amazing fertility.
@Aphrodite801 most women have kids in their 30s nowadays. just in case you didn't know. More people have kids in 30s than in 20s
@aliali8 yes most American women anyway, cause we rule
Dude you don’t know shit. Complications don’t skyrocket. Especially if the woman has already had a kid. I can’t believe how lazy dudes like you are.
www.mayoclinic.org/.../art-20045756
More American women are having babies in their 30s than their 20s
www.marketwatch.com/.../american-women-are-having-babies-later-and-are-still-conflicted-about-it-2017-05-19
Can somebody find mines? Or, maybe my hearing is off. Because, I don't hear "Nuthin!" LOL!
Every animal has lifespan right? Actually every entity
Dumb question
Yep. Woman also lose sex drive on age 40. Better get knocked up before it's too late.
women tend to have higher sex drives as they enter their 40s. Its nature's way of making sure women should make the very best of their last menstral years.
I haven't seen horny 40 year old lol
Women: 30s and Early 40s
This time of life may be when your sex drive is strongest. One study showed that women between 27 and 45 had more frequent and more intense sexual fantasies than younger or older women. They also had more sex and were more likely to have it sooner in a relationship.
https://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/ss/slidesh
A new journal article suggests that evolutionary forces also push women to be more sexual, although in unexpected ways. University of Texas psychologist David Buss wrote the article, which appears in the July issue of Personality and Individual Differences , with the help of three graduate students, Judith Easton (who is listed as lead author), Jaime Confer and Cari Goetz. Buss, Easton and their colleagues found that women in their 30s and early 40s are significantly more sexual than younger women. Women ages 27 through 45 report not only having more sexual fantasies (and more intense sexual fantasies) than women ages 18 through 26 but also having more sex, period. And they are more willing than younger women to have casual sex, even one-night stands. In other words, despite the girls-gone-wild image of promiscuous college women, it is women in their middle years who are America's most sexually industrious.
content.time.com/.../0,9171,2007422,00.html
Of course for me, but i never cared for having kids. Not interested. Very busy with my life
I imagine all people have one, sometimes it goes off but rarely ever does
I don't know I've found 40 year old women attractive. If men won't fuck em, women will. 👁️👄👁️
Family Guy is lame. It’s full of incel bullshit anymore too.
You’re also shit for making fun of chicks. Sorry ass.
Yes it does because it refers to when she can no longer have kids
A woman doesn't have to worry about not being able to have kids anymore. Because they can always have kids before 40.
I think you're a troll and want to instigate drama.
Isn’t that what most questions are like on this website?
so you don't deny it... nice
well everything mentioned in the question were FACTS.
i can pull just as many "facts" out of my ass too...
you know its true. you're just pissed that men can't have kids before 40 while women can. Once you're an old man or fat old uncle, no young lady would be interested in you. Sorry i pissed you off even further
I was thinking your next reply to this would be links to proof of your claims you’re making... but nope you resort back to trolling. It’s pretty clear what your agenda is then
So what proof do you have that I am wrong? Do women not have a choice when to have kids?
Charts from a french study concludes that "Postponing births beyond age 30-35 is a problem, mainly at the individual level but also for its demographic consequences" lots of overwhelming data in here:
web.archive.org/.../PCB05-Leridon.pdf
Results and conclusion from a paper from Obstetrics & Gynecology
"Older mothers also had greater risks for fetal morbidity and mortality than their immediate younger counterparts (40–49 year olds)"
"Pregnancy beyond age 50 was associated with increased risks for the fetus. Our findings suggest that this age group is a distinct obstetric high-risk entity that requires special counseling before and after conception."
www.sciencedirect.com/.../S0029784403007397
That’s not proof that I am wrong
That doesn’t mean I am wrong that women are garuanteed children in her life. A woman doesn’t have to worry about not being able to have kids in her life. If she really wanted them, she would already have kids by the age of 40.
No need to worry about birth defects either. A woman can pick if she want to have a kid at 33 or 39. It’s her choice.
On the other hand men do not have any control over when he has kids. It would depend on when he gets married
You’re original question was “do women really have a biological clock” the answer is overwhelmingly yes. It seems to differ on an individual level but aggregate data says it happens mid- late thirties and later. And although yes older women at those ages can and does happen the data says that those births will likely have birth defects.
Now men also have increased chances of defective sperm developing a fetus with birth defects as well, As recent science seems to say. But that’s not what you asked. also you going around calling people names is not productive if you want to convince people of your point. Its likely to have the opposite effect.
Now if that’s not your goal here then I stand corrected. That just makes you kind of a twat then for the way you’re acting with people here.
Women don’t have to worry about biological clock because she can have control over when she has her kids. There is no clock if she doesn’t have to rush.
On the other hand, men have a biological clock.
Waiting until you’re 45 , still no kids , no wife. Then you’re 50 and still waiting for a wife. Meanwhile your sperm quality diminishes every year that you wait. You start looking old and ugly, then no young woman wants you.
This is what biological clock is. The longer you wait, the worse the result.
“Women don’t have to worry about biological clock because she can have control over when she has her kids. There is no clock if she doesn’t have to rush.“
The data says otherwise or I guess you didn’t bother reading any of it? Facts don’t care about your feelings so just accept that BOTH men and women have biological clocks. It’s not mine or anyone else’s fault if you choose not to listen and want healthy kids later in your adult life.
If you have different overwhelming conflicting data saying women don’t have biological clocks post it here otherwise you’re just farting into wind with your pointless tirades.
You’re hurting my feelings? By the time I’m 40, I’ll be the one with kids. The last thing I’m worried about is about the “biological clock”. Why would I be hurt? I already have kids
You won’t have any kids by 40. You will continue Waiting until your looks fade , turn old and ugly. And no young women is interested in an old man. So your chances of having kids will only go down as you get older.
The one who is pissed and mad and hurt is you. Women have an advantage that you don’t have
I do have kids lmao.
Anyways looks like you don’t have any real data to back up your claims. We’re done here troll.
I don’t need any data to back up my claim that women are guaranteed kids in life. If a woman wants kids, she would have kids.
You’re just mad that women have this advantage over men
Not very healthy kids according to data...
I would have healthier kids than you. Because I can pick when to have my kids. I can have kids at 28, 30 or at 39.
On the other hand, you will keep waiting until you’re 40 then 45 then 60. Your sperm quality decreasing Every year. If you have a kid at 59, there’s a bigger chance of it coming out fucked up.
Men have no control over when to have kids. Women do
Look at you... so triggered because you can’t backup your own shit with actual data. Keep it coming. Maybe you’ll have a real point some day.
You’re triggered because you know this is the truth
Yawnnnn
I know right. I got you soo pissed
Still wondering where your scientifically backed papers and stats are to back up your claims.
![Does a woman's "biological clock" really exist?]()
What do you want me to back up. You have never even mentioned what I need to back up
You’re trying to contradict the narrative that women have biological clocks and that they can’t have kids even into their middle age without linking to any data in the details of your question.
I provided overwhelming evidence that they do in fact have biological clocks and that if they wait the more likely it is that if they have successful births they will have defects.
I also threw you a bone and stated that men also have biological clocks too (modern science is leading to that conclusion). So BOTH men and women need to realize that waiting to have kids comes with more and more risks for them as have serious discussions, preferably with a doctor, before having any at an older age.
And instead of refuting any of this with counter evidence or data you just want to call names instead. Your agenda seems to just be hating on men which is evident in your responses to everyone here. And while I will also acknowledge there are a number of women hating incels in the world, there are also a number of man hating feminazis as well. That’s what you are right now.
So if you have data by all means produce it, otherwise you’re wasting mine and everyone’s mind and brain cells the more you talk... kapeesh?
I believe that you don't understand the reason why I am asking this question.
My question was not about "Can a woman still give birth at 60 years old?"
The reason why I asked this question is
"Is there really a biological clock pressuring women to have kids before she becomes infertile?"
Because I see FERTILE 35 yr old women being worried about never having kids in their lives. But why would you complain about not being able to have kids WHEN YOU ARE STILL FERTILE?
I just don't understand the idiocy behind this. If i were 35 and unmarried, i would just have my own children. Because its my life goal to have kids.
"If i were 35 and unmarried, i would just have my own children. Because its my life goal to have kids. "
and my response to that would be ok have them, make sure to talk extensively with a doctor first and do some serious planning ahead and be aware that birth defects have a higher chance of occurring at that age then they do at a younger age. if you fully get all that then go for it. maybe you'll get lucky and your baby will be healthy. If it turns out its unhealthy well... i hope you have the fortitude to accept that burden.
My mom had me at 37 and my brother at 40. My brother and I turned out fine. We grew up, went to college, got decent jobs. I also knew 3 other women who gave birth at 49, 44, and 43.
anecdotal evidence isn't useful.
but hey good for you guys though.
A woman has control over when she can have kids. I can pick to have kids at 32 or 39. On the other hand, men have no control over when he has kids. It would be dependent on when he can get married. But as he ages, he starts looking old and ugly. Sperm quality deteriorating by the year. No young lady would want him. I'd say men should be more worried about having a kid with birth defects than women. Waiting until 49 years old to have kids, is not a good thing.
okay...
Of course it does and it's not even "patriarchy" that causes it.
Yes, but modern science has made this a lot easier and is not so much an issue anymore.
Well aren’t you a little bitch. 🤨
of course I am because you're probably a bitter old man angry that he's 45 years old and still childless.
Women in 30s now having more babies than younger moms in US
www.cnbc.com/.../...s-than-younger-moms-in-us.html
There is a real biological clock, you can't have children as you approach 40 years old. You can adopt I suppose, but that's not what biological clock means.
why would a woman adopt kids if she can birth her own kids? Only men adopt because they can't have their own kids
women can't birth their own kids after around 40 years old
i would already have kids by 40 years old. A 40 yr old man won't.
And by the way my mom birthed me at 37 and my brother at 40.
Women in 30s now having more babies than younger moms in US
www.cnbc.com/.../...s-than-younger-moms-in-us.html
I think a lot of dudes on Gag are misinformed about the severity of the birth defects that can occur as men and women age. It isn’t as significant as some guys like to think. Remember women- men try to control women that way. Don’t trust punks.
Had to follow you after that answer.
Women don’t have to worry about that. She has control over when she has kids at 32 or 39. On the other hand men have no control over while he has kids. It depends on when he can manage to get married
Yeah well they do worry about it.
why would I? I can have my child at 29 or 32 instead of 39
What’s wrong with 39? I’m very sorry you hate me for no reason. I was on your side with age and having children. But that’s fine.
In fact, I don’t think you’ve listened or even comprehended a single word I’ve said.
why did you think that i hate you? I don't. I'm just explaining why you're wrong about things.
Again you didn’t read what I said or didn’t comprehend. I thought I made myself clear though that men try to control women by scaring them into having kids by a certain age. I even called guys like that punks. But hey that’s cool of you think I’m wrong for saying that. Yeah cupcake some men do worry women about it. I wasn’t one of them and you even scared me away.
hmm... i am aware of that. But this question is just a response to the misogynists shaming older women on this website.
Sorry stopped reading your replies. Don’t need hate. There is plenty of that. Sad you’re like a Christian who says they have the best intentions but then shit on everything and everyone.
well if you're gonna hate on women on here, don't be surprised they hate on you back
Sounds more like you're venting than a question
This is just a good response to all the misogynists shaming older women on here
But it mAkes sense to me cus it’s my life goal to have kids. I would have kids even if I never got married.
From what I've heard from women I actually know, most of them really want kids someday (most of the older women I encounter say they wish they had known they wanted that sooner.
Thanks for validation!
@junelady Listen women do not have to worry about any biological clock. Why? Because if a woman wants children, she would have children, regardless if she was married or not. It really doesn't make any sense about 35 yr old women complain about being too infertile to have kids, when she is STILL FERTILE!!! If you want children, then have children!
And with our current high divorce rates of 46%, almost half of all marriages end in divorce. there's no point in getting married either way
Men are physically able to impregnate a woman at any age. Women can't give birth at any age. So women do have a biological clock unlike men
But when you're old and ugly, what makes you think you can get a young woman? Young women have so many better options around her.
I am just speaking from a biological perspective. Also Trump got 3 models and he wasn't attractive enough to even get one without his money. Ergo if I have a ton of money, I could get a hot model if I wanted.
You're living proof that old people are just as shallow as young ones.
Trump's wives aren't real wives. The first one was a real wife. The last 2 were just "hired" wives. Do you ever see melania giving donald affection in public? The couple are detached as fuck. Melania is the most miserable and detached first lady in the history of the white house. Its not a marriage of love, its just an exchange of sex and money.
Yea sure you can marry as a 60 yr old man, your wife will just be a prostitute who will only stay married to you for your money. Cut off her allowance, she will be gone in a second.
Donald trump's son , barron is also autistic. Because trump had him when he was 59 years old.
I'm autistic my dad had me when he was 39. He had my sister whe he was 40. My sister is NT.
My mom had me at 37 and my bro at 40. We both turned out fine.
If a woman truly cared about her children, she wouldn't have a kid with a guy over the age of 44.
its much harder for an older man to impregnate a woman too. His sperm is also much more likely to result in miscarriages and kids with mental illnesses
How many men are millionaires like Trump though? And don't men always claim to hate golddiggers?
@mistixs when you're 55 yr old man, waited your entire life to have kids, but no woman would pay any attention to you. You would have kids even with a nasty gold digger, because he is that desperate. And if this were your child, you would have to pray to god that nothing bad would happen to your child. Just because a child is born without problems, it also does not mean it is free from any diseases such as mental illnesses or cancer as it grows up.
Yeah to some it does, you don’t need someone to have kids with if you are financially able to on your own but some old guys are stable, mature and financially stable too so that’s why some women choose them
women become financially stable as they hit their 30s too. By the time they hit that age, most women can support their own kids.
Yeah true with most but it is easier to raise children as a couple because you’ll never to have someone to watch them while at work
You’ll someone who you can trust basically or have to pay for
thats what daycare is for. that is what school is for.
I was raised by both working parents, mom and dad. After i finished school at 3pm, i was handed over to the after school program where I was taught by tutors to do my homework and play with other kids. My parents came to pick me up to go home at 6pm daily.
So certainly it is doable.
It’s doable but wouldn’t it have been better if one of your parents were home for a few years? At least my mom was
my mom was never home because we were a poor family struggling to make ends meet. She and my dad had to work. Ever since i was young, both my parents had to work. I don't remember what happened when i was 1-3 years old. I was probably taken care of by grandparents. But from age 4 and onwards, i was sent to daycare. Then at 5, i started elementary school. Of course when i was sick , my parents did take parental leave from work. But i rarely got sick as a kid. Maybe once a year with a mild cold.
Yeah I was too but they did manage somehow with just my dad working, I never saw him much unfortunately, they divorced when I was 13 . At least I lasted 17 years in mine, my ex didn’t work for years in the beginning. Well hopefully you can find someone even you don’t marry
im not a romantic person so marrying for "romance" is not important to me.
romance is good to have once in your life time so you can know what it feels like. but would i say that it is crucial to happiness? HELL NO. The reason why people are so obsessed with romance is because they have a deep insecurity below the conscious levels of the brain. Ultimately you crave to be validated and to be loved, which is why you're so desperate for romance
Everyone does want to be loved deep down maybe that’s why some have children
no i have kids because they are a miracle. i don't have my kids to be loved. i love kids because i love it.
type error:
no i have kids because they are a miracle. i don't have my kids to be loved. i have*** kids because i love it.
Not everyone but some do
when you have kids, you give out love. If you have a partner, you receive love. Thats the difference. Kids receive more than they give out
Yeah well I have three daughters and two stepsons so I know what it’s like to have kids, they don’t show it as much as we do for them
well if you're a parent, you would understand that parents give out more love than they receive.
I’m a father to 3 daughters so I know but they are good at giving now at 21 years old
parents give out more than they receive. its common knowledge. no need to argue about it.
I wasn’t but they got better as they got older
listen no kid would love a parent that never loved them. Your kids love you because you cared for them well. I would never love my parents if they neglected me. Its just the simple truth
Yeah of course
From my own experience yes, it does exist.
it doesn't because a woman can always have kids. why should she worry about not being able to have kids in life?
Does a woman's biorogicar crock learry exist?
Lol