Why do pedofiles use 'girls got married at 12 or 13 in the olden days' to justify...

M

Millie A

New member
...their attraction to kids? Thats not true. I just read an answer here by 'Captain Obvious' which got 3 thumbs ups. He said 'girls got married at 12 or 13 in the olden days so its normal to be attracted to them. don't judge!" WTF? I remember when I was 12, this was about 7 years ago, I weighed 30 kgs (70 lbs), I was completely flat-chested, I still had a baby face. The average age of marriage was 17 for women and 19 for men even in the 1800s. Girls got their periods when they were 15 or 16 back then because of a bad diet, so why would they get married at 12, they wouldn't have even gone through puberty yet (no breasts, hips, etc). The average age of menarche has decreased dramatically in the last 100 years, this is called 'the secular trend', because of better nutrition. Some people are so uneducated and dumb.

Please google 'average age of marriage in 1850' and 'the secular trend in menarche'

Thanks.
Paul Giro - Actually it wasn't normal even in the 1600s.. Like I said, girls got their periods when they were 16, so why would they get married at 13? Sources, please? My major is anthropology so I know what I'm tallking about.
To quote his answer:
"I'm male 27 and I don't think I'd go younger than 20 for a relationship. If its just sex then I could go as low as 14.

Yeah thats right. Sick by "societies standards" but not by natures standards. According to nature.. you are an adult once you can reproduce. So that would be 12 or 13. And in the 1700's it was very common for 12 year olds to have sex with adults. No one said sh*t.

So take your judgemental gaze elsewhere."
 
That's definitely gross, and upsetting.
Worse yet, there are plenty of bastards that get away with it.

It is interesting to note that there are plenty of figures throughout history that by today's standards would be considered pedophiles. For example Casanova, and John Smith. John Smith was 46 when he married Pocahontas who was 13 at the time. Gross.
 
The law changed in 1895 to raise the age of consent from 13 to 16 over here in the UK. There is no justification for having sex with children.
 
Being attracted to much younger people is actually so common, that it is not considered a fetish anymore by the psychiatrist association (or a similar organism). The problem is that in our culture it's shocking for a little girls to be approached by older men, it can cause you a psychological shock, even if you're already developed. At 10/11 I was already a full fledged woman, but just a girl in my mind.
 
OK I can see what you mean but you must realise that a pedophile only wish to be with a child who is not to the age of puberty. So only like a 6 or 7 year old for those freaks. But that does not mean it is OK for a grown man to be with a 12 or 13 year old child either. It is still sick. I would not touch anyone that young or I will feel like a monster.
 
Technically paedophelia is defined as a sexual attraction to PREPUBESCENT children. Twelve or thirteen year olds have usually gone through or are in the midst of puberty. It is true that prior to the 1600's, the usual age of marriage was ten-thirteen, and girls had children by the time they were thirteen or fourteen. Marriage was a social contract between two families and not about romance or attraction. That is a modern concept. Your major is anthropology? You don't sound old enough to have a highschool diploma...I agree that the 'girls got married at 12 or 13 in the olden days' argument is silly, but the facts you are using to expose it as silly aren't even facts...
 
It's called confirmation bias. Pedophiles will use the few examples there are of girls marrying at age 12 and 13 in England (1700's+) to conclude that it is natural. They will ignore the fact that most women waited until they were 17-20 to marry, at least in England during the 1700's- mid 1900's.

Even if it occurred commonly in some cultures, which unfortunately it has, they will try and use that to justify that it's a good thing instead of realizing that the people who gave their 12 year old daughters to middle aged men were just sick or did it out of convenience because they could not afford to feed her.

I'm no historian, I could be wrong. This is just my opinion.
 
What makes you think the people who say those things are only talking about 1850?

There have always been societies in which pedophilia was common practice, and there still exist such societies today. There's a reason why the lowest age of consent set has generally been around nine years old. And everyone knows about the Ancient Greeks carrying on relations with children.

The reason people use that to justify pedophilia is because it proves our society's current stigma is just a social construct, and contrary to the nature of human beings. It's really quite fascinating, if you're the sort of person who takes an interest in the study of human nature.
 
He's just someone looking for sick validation, and who doesn't know his history very well. It is rather rare for women to have gotten married at 12 or 13 in the "olden days." Unlike today, women got their periods much later (possible due to less hormones in their food, unlike modern days). Some women didn't get their periods until 18! A more average age was 16 or 17, although some married as young as 15 (it is thought that the Athenian girls got married as young as 15, and even in Greek culture it was understood that 15 was young).

The only time marriages have been 12 or 13 (or even younger) are/were in highly female oppressed societies, such as Afghanistan, and these girls were called "child brides," signifying that even the culture understood these girls were quite young for marriage.

I do think it should be noted that girls marrying as young as 13 did happen in some of the 1300s, though this age was mostly amongst the nobles. The average age for a woman to marry in Italy was 17, while France was 16, and Germany at 18. Not nearly what the poster is projecting. However, despite the national averages being so high, the age amongst nobel families was much younger, due to political needs and the press for heirs.

I think the poster is either a troll looking for a rise out of people, or an uneducated, ignorant individual searching for an excuse for why he is attracted to and desires prepubescent girls.
 
Before the 1700's people were having sex and getting married at 12 and 13.

Attraction doesn't need to be "justified". It is what it is. What makes you the authority one what age someone can be sexually attractive?

Your values are based on your culture and the society you live in. They mean nothing in nature. That was my point.

Too bad you don't have the brain power for critical thinking. *shrugs*

EDIT: If you people could read.. you would see that you are not a "child" if you can reproduce. Not in nature. Just in society. You can all stop your moralizing because you all have skeletons in your closet as well. Take your holier than thou attitude elsewhere.
 
When people say the "olden days" they're referring to past the 1650s... like shakespeare time and before, when it was normal for a girl to marry at at the age of 13.
 
Misogynists always drag up the past when women were saddled up and driven into the ground. At least normal posters are being alerted to the pedos on this site.
 
Misogynists always drag up the past when women were saddled up and driven into the ground. At least normal posters are being alerted to the pedos on this site.
 
Back
Top