
None of that merits a response.
Ah, the “sour grapes because I have nothing to counter with” argument.
Still, you did take the high(er) road, in that you did not descend to an ad hominem as so many ideologically blinkered people do when their core brainwashing is directly challenged with real-world evidence. For avoiding that, I must actually commend you. So pick up a textbook and bone up on facts, and you won’t be caught with your intellectual pants down again.
I never denied that. However, pregnancies that had no modern medical involvement in its creation become very rare after the age of 40, and vanishingly rare after the age of 50.
To wit,
“The rate of decline accelerates around the age of 35 and the vast majority of women are essentially infertile by the time they reach 45,”
I claimed that pregnancies after 35 are called “geriatric pregnancies”, and that is due to the risks that they bring. This is a medical term, used throughout the industry for pregnancies after the age of 35
And fertility begins to drop noticeably after 32, and really begins to plummet after 35.
If you’re going to be referencing a hate screed by misandrists - and yes, almost every sentence of the Wikipedia article is either a gross exaggeration, a deliberate mischaracterization, or an outrightght lie - then you are operating wholly in bad faith.
It’s a female supremacist movement.
And there is that outright mischaracterization, which is pretty much bordering on a lie, that I was expecting. Most MGTOW have no strong opinion against abortion, because a female exercising her right to abort can also release the man from a quarter century’s worth of unwilling financial enslavement. And many are fully in favour of abortion rights for both genders… which include paper abortions for men, which bring near-complete parity and equality of that right to both sexes.