Um, a woman's breasts begin lactating as a result of becoming pregnant. This has nothing to do with puberty other than the fact that a girl needs to have hit puberty before she's able to get pregnant. Case and point: If you can get pregnant, you sure as hell can breastfeed.
If your mother finds/found out about the sleep-over, I just want you to know... It was me. :3
Although I wouldn't use a Korn music video as the sole justification for this, the video did suggest quite a few things. Notice how the "1.5 children" family seemed to look more "proper" and more well-off in the aesthetics, while the "5 children" family seemed more like the trailer-trash family without decent clothing? First off, there is no real accurate way to measure IQ, as there are just too many facets that are impossible to gauge and measure. Secondly, it's not really that more children = lower IQ. At least Korn's music video had the decency to make it apparant that the IQ deficiency is definitely a more complicated issue than simply the number of children. It's only natural that the "5 children" family, who was depicted/drawn as your typical dysfunctional family that is most likely on welfare and don't have a very great chance of getting a good education. Children in that kind of family demographic would score lower on these IQ tests because they aren't raised in an environment that allows them to expand their knowledge in the way others who have the resources and the ability to, can. The number of children in a family has absolutely no correlation with average IQ and never has in any psychological study I've come across. On the other hand, there is plenty research supporting that it is socioeconomical factors that contribute more, which is definitely what I think that Korn music video was getting at. It was blatantly obvious after they showed both families that this was the case. It's also not uncommon that these families with financial problems (and thus not having the resources to effectively allow their children to excel intellectually) are those with a larger number of children, and thus why Korn even makes an effort to make note of the difference. *Note: The above was not a rebuttal to anyone's post in any way.
Booo. IE ftl.
A reason that isn't entirely valid when it worked just fine many decades ago. It's not a question of banning opposing arguments, but the fact that said opposition is for the most part, irrelevant in sight of more predominant facets that deal with the issue. Which quite frankly, you'll never know and thus don't have the right to pass judgment about their desire to want/have children. You cannot deny these seniors the right to procreate because that will suddenly put an age limit to how long you can bear children. Once you start creating constitutional laws as to why a person is not fit to bear a child, a million more will come tomorrow, and will only get worse like the slippery slope argument that it is.
Sue me for bumping this old thread. Well, at least it's confirmed that Last Remnant will feature both English and Japanese voice-overs. The question now is if the game itself will be dual-language, or are we going to simply have two separate ones (Japanese and English versions) released at the same time? It'd obviously save them production costs to release it as a dual-language, but I can't judge just how much space the game will need--although I'd like to say that the Blu-ray disc can handle it.
Oh, I thought he just had his Byakugan activated ... *NERDY SOUSHI FAIL* ... A Hyuuga dog from Sand Village. <.<
By today's ethics, pregnancy at that age is considered wrong. It wasn't in the past, however I'm not saying it should be changed. Thank you. Technology today was not as advanced as it was in the 80s, or the 70s, or the 60s, hell even the 1800s, but people were having kids around 14-15 without too much problem, if you ask me. Thus, like Peace-and-War already said, there are risks with pregnancy despite whatever age you are, so posting articles about the risks of having children at such a young age is completely irrelevant considering it worked just fine in the past, even without current technology in medicine. This debate can really only be held from an ethical perspective, but as I've said before, that ethic has changed because it's becoming more expensive to sustain human life. There wasn't much for women to do back then except bear children, look after them, do chores around the house, etc, while the man would bring home the money to sustain their way of life. But now that the price to live has increased, and women now being well involved in today's working society and have many of the freedoms men do, it's obvious that the age when 'women should be bearing children' has changed. No mother would be screaming "But my child hasn't even finished high school yet!" back in the 1800s. Instead they'd be trying to marry their daughters off to the most successful men out there to assure their child's future and survival. So those of you who are trying to argue the ethics of young girls bearing children, keep in mind that your opinion has been shaped by the kind of society you live in today, and that you'd probably be one of those mothers looking for a successful man to marry off your daughter to if you lived way back when. As well, many of you are assuming that a man who wishes to impregnate minors will abandon them and as such minors being pregnant is wrong. Yes, by today's law it's called statutory rape and is thus illegal to do, but you shouldn't automatically assume that their intention is to get some quick sex then run out on said minor. Yes, it's uncommon in today's society and frowned upon by many protective and opinionated parents, but I wouldn't be so quick to judge a man's feelings for an underage girl as something 'wrong'. Many men with sincere intentions solve this problem by simply waiting until the girl is at the right age before they can have a 'legal'/'socially acceptable' relationship. I'm pretty certain that if both the law and society allowed them to marry and have kids when the girl was 14-15, they'd probably do so. As for seniors, it's really a choice they have to make. Like Zexion said, they are full-fledged adults and the law isn't against them to have children; the law can make you too young to have sex, but you can't be too old to have sex--that is simply something we, the population have made into our own social norm. I personally think they can do whatever they want. It *would* be nice if they could at least be able to provide for their kids until they can stand on their own two feet, but I wouldn't deny anyone at their age to have a child if they wanted one.
Worst dub I've ever watched. Nelvana can actually go die.
I can see why almost every critic has considered the gameplay a hybrid of Star Ocean & Tales. The status screens are dangerously similar to those in SO3, XD--the way they run as well. Looks like an interesting game. By the way, how extensive in the Multiplayer? Is it only in certain modes like this Unknown Mode? Or can you do multiplayer in the main story? As well, can the '2nd' player join in and join out at any time (like you can pause the battle and let 2nd player join, and vice versa to pull out)? And is it only 2 players at most? XD
Super Mods need to do that too, lol. You don't need to log in to close/merge/move threads, etc, but when it comes to forum functioning, forum settings, bannings, etc, you need to log in.
Like libregkd already said, it's on a Blu-Ray disc, meaning it's going to be rendered in full HD (1080P I presume). The 2004 one was recorded on standard DVD-R, meaning it's porting 480P at most without the assistance of an upscaler. However, upscaling to 1080P will not match the quality of a raw 1080P recording on a blu-ray disc, which is what this AC: Complete is. It also has some extra scenes in it (either in the Special Features as Deleted Scenes, or in the actual movie). I don't remember which one it was, I read the description sometime ago.
Used to. But now it's pretty natural; muscle memory ftw.
This is such a good thread to have spoilers. XDD Let Neji beat Naruto in the chuunin exam. ;D Good effort, Kyuubi, but no. =)
I don't know. I think these are things society places on itself. Back in the day, it wasn't uncommon for girls to be married and having children around 14, and that wasn't looked as a crime. It's obvious that this 'correct age of pregnancy' has simply been adapted to the change in social norms due to an expanded education system, the battle for women's rights, etc. In the end, it really depends what kind of life you want to live. While it'd probably be uncommon for girls to having babies around 14 these days, it's certainly nothing that couldn't be achieved if said lady had her financial needs taken cared of until she dies.
The wonders of the spacebar.
Grats, Xaldin. XD Well done.
Wow, dudes. - Closed - PM me for objections, but I really don't see why.
This thread is a heap of disappointment. lol.
Yesss.... join people. Keep joining.
