• darctiger88@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yup. Whenever someone tries to justify underage marriage with “most fertile period” or “it’s always been the norm”, you know they’re a pedo. Teenage pregnancies are risky because the pelvis hasn’t fully developed, and the girl is more likely to suffer severe depression as well. Most fertile age is more like 19-32 not 12-18. Also, I live in the UK and marriage records kept by the church from the 1400s show the vast majority of girls married for the first time in their early twenties, not teen years :)

    • RBWells@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah I looked up my family on the Mormon genealogy site and was surprised how many of the women married around 28-30 years old. Certainly not as teens and I really was surprised. Like, I as a modern woman had kids younger than a good chunk of my ancestresses.

    • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Truth. Marriages at a super young age were not normal outside of nobility doing it for political alliance reasons and even then the general advice were not to try for a pregnancy because your risks of killing a young spouse were astronomically high. However the concept was popularized by fiction that basically wanted to trade on the idea of a gritty nasty medieval age where the darkness of the human soul cam be laid bare and how mankind has evolved into a kinder more civilized place… basically the same thematic itch as Warhammer grimdark logic.

      In regards to the whole “darkness of the human soul” thing it really doesn’t stack. People just want to believe their personal id (as in the Freudian concept, not “identity” ) is more universal than it is.