- Joined
- Dec 13, 2022
Romans were gay. Source - Senator Dickus Maximus said about that his political opponent was fucking young boys and that his wife was getting gangbanged.So last time it was left wingers bitching about 'muh blacks' and now it's right wingers bitching about 'muh gays'.
It's almost as though history is a messy, apolitical thing that everyone invokes selectively.
If we ordering I'd like a realistic depiction of the Romans. Now that will piss everyone off.
In 2000 years someone is going to find a stash of furry porn and will conclude that everyone at the time was a gay furry.
While this is very informative, I think its worth noting the records of births are ALL royalty, not peasants. They would be richer, fed better, protected more, have doctors, and their lives would be more valued. I mentioned earlier how fatalities from births ARE higher when really young, or really old, but ALSO how surviving a birth makes subsequent births easier.
So I'm pretty sure for ROYALTY yes, they would wait longer because a would be queen dying would be terrible, but a "worthless" dime a dozen peasant expected to breed a dozen farmers / soldiers would be treated as INDIVIDUALLY more disposable, so if 1 girl died in childbirth, but another survived, and had 10 kids, it evened out.
Like I think functional fatality risk for a typical female with childbirth has an inverse bellcurve for women of the time, yes, first is risky, but it goes rapidly down from both maturity and prior births making the process something the body has done before, toward a low level, before ramping quickly up as she enters middle age.
Yes i agree, much like today people at bottom of society had children younger. 12 year olds having kids happens today but its not common and was never common or normal.
Last edited: