Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #64 - pepemex (04/27/2013) [-]
Throughout history what's normal is for girls to get pregnant as soon as they're fertile. I don't see why teenage pregnancy is an issue now when it's been the norm for thousands of years. Look up at what age your great great great great grandmothers got pregnant.
User avatar #135 to #64 - phantomrose (04/27/2013) [-]
A lot of **** was "normal" throughout history--a lot of stuff that was really messed up. People got pregnant earlier because they died earlier; that doesn't make raising a baby as a teenager any less strenuous on either the body or the mind.

Historically, it was necessary, and women had no say anyway. Now, when people should go out and live their lives first, it's a big deal.
User avatar #155 to #135 - helenwheels (04/27/2013) [-]
Well, maybe not mind, but a young body is far better built to handle giving birth.
User avatar #166 to #155 - phantomrose (04/27/2013) [-]
Well, that depends on what "young" is. pepmex said as soon as they're fertile, and I got my first period a few weeks after my 11th birthday. I think a 20-something-year-old's body would be much better at handling the strain of pregnancy.
User avatar #182 to #166 - helenwheels (04/28/2013) [-]
Well, I think his point is that it's natural to have a higher sex drive as a teenager.
#140 to #135 - 4chan refugee (04/27/2013) [-]
Not really, if you made it to puberty you'd more than likely live into your 50's. Infant mortality was incredibly high, but once you made it past infancy, life expectancy shot up dramatically.
#134 to #64 - 4chan refugee (04/27/2013) [-]
At lot of them ******* died during birth too, because they weren't developed enough to properly handle a baby. Just because it was done, doesn't mean it was a good idea.
#127 to #64 - 4chan refugee (04/27/2013) [-]
It's called progression, and a ton of impoverished single mothers inhibits that.
User avatar #87 to #64 - xjessicaxrabbitx (04/27/2013) [-]
Girls didn't have a choice in getting pregnant. Her father married her off when she got her period and she probably died giving birth. Social studies of developing nations show that given the option of birth control and education woman chose to have children later and to have fewer children. Don't base today's society on archaic, patriarchal systems.
User avatar #88 to #87 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
Not to mentions woman gave birth so young back then mostly to men twice their age if not older for the sole purpose of having those children do agricultural work and labor. Today men and woman have no need to have 15 children to run the farm, and the national standard has dipped down to two children per household. That is in part because in today's world men and women both have different requirements focusing primarily on gaining an education for an adequate job.
User avatar #95 to #88 - xjessicaxrabbitx (04/27/2013) [-]
Don't leave out the fact she needed to give birth at least two males regardless of social status to ensure an heir. Or the fact that birth control was made illegal after The Plague in order to help repopulate Europe. The economy collapsed after The Plague as too many died and the workforce couldn't be replaced and heirs died leaving no one to claim estates. Kids often died, especially in the first five years. Having a lot of children ensured having some survive to adulthood, especially when the life expectancy was only about 40. Children were a necessity. Today they are not, and today we live much longer. We are still children at 18 when before we were middle aged.
#99 to #95 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
**** , I'm a believer in making the majority of the world sterile to avoid over-population issues until lunar colonization and space exploration is taken more seriously. Nb4 I'm claims to my heresy, I think it would work if every male and female were given a series of tests including knowledge based, physical, and genetic lineage checks would be required to be allowed to reproduced. This could wipe out dozens of diseases in a single generation as well as leading to a path of perfecting human genetics for heightened immune systems and physical as well as intellectual performance.
User avatar #105 to #99 - xjessicaxrabbitx (04/27/2013) [-]
The problem with that is you cannot solve the issue right away. Then you end up with a population problem seen after The Plague and currently in Japan. When you immediately try and curb the population growth instead of gradually you end up with an upsidedown triangle, meaning many older people and few younger. This poses an economic issue. Currently the economy is sustained with the workforce. Without enough people to replace this workforce the economy would collapse. You have to lower the birth rate slowly to ensure the economy can survive a large drop in population.
User avatar #117 to #105 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
Or we could use machines to do a large portion of work (which is already happening with one of those people who shouldn't reproduce pushing all of the buttons). I mean, yeah, I see where you're coming from on that point. It's just... the majority of our world is run on machines and space is made in the labor and machining force for people with no degrees or issues with law enforcement. I'm not saying this general idea is the perfect transition into a higher quality of human life, but it is definitely something I think could start it.
User avatar #157 to #117 - xjessicaxrabbitx (04/27/2013) [-]
We don't have the technology for all those machines yet. We also have different population problems in different areas. Europe has a negative birth rate, third world countries are dying, India is overpopulated and growing, etc. It's not one solution for all countries. The world population is going up but not at a steady rate throughout the world. Not to mention eugenics is a very touchy subject. It strips a lot of rights, especially rights over one's own body. I don't support it since it's a slippery slope that could have some really bad effects, but I do think we need to solve population problems.
User avatar #104 to #99 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
If you use selective DNA taken from a few "perfect" samples, considering how much alike all those DNA's would be in time the inbreed would wind up making a tard race.


User avatar #108 to #104 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
It's not selective samples from a handful of perfect people. No one is perfect. It just so happens to be that not everyone should have children. People who have diseases like Huntington's, Cat Lyme, and an assortment of STD's pass those on to their children and could easily be eradicated in one fail swoop. So, it isn't going to be from a few dozen people, just those who are smarter, more fit, and have less genetic abnormalities or illnesses that could cause issues to those in their lineage. Because any olympic athlete will say that they are were they are today because of their genetics, who wouldn't pay buttloads for Micheal Phelps sperm? Even though it is partially due to random chance as well, genetically speaking, the building blocks are there, and once there, they can be activated down the line of reproduction for every offspring once genetic manipulation becomes more practical.

On a side note, those who fit the bill could go to sperm banks for women in relationships with men unable to meet the standards and collect from others who could. With that and adoption, there isn't really a downside to this in my mind.
User avatar #120 to #108 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
There is not a problem with overpopulation, and as you said it's partially due to random chance, my father was tall and slim, my mother was tall and slim my brother and I are both tall and Huge built, there's no predicting what will come out and what you're talking abuot is just a more rationalized concept than that of hitler's Arian master race. People with aids can have children aids free now.
Natural seleccion works fine as it is.
I've spent two days playing starcraft 2 and heart of the swarm, and in heart of the swarm you play the zergs, zergs are constantly evolving at an increadible rate, adapting, you have to pick now and then what evolution you want for some of the creatures and when push comes to shove you realize that they are both really great and you just end up picking what suits your strategy best, god i'm addicted to video games.
User avatar #124 to #120 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
There isn't an issue with over-population?

By 2020, we as a planet are expected to reach and exceed eight billion, mind you, in the year 2000, we were at six. By 2050, or growth is estimated to advance by 80 million per year.

We are at the highest point in all of history, with technological advancements in all things including agriculture, we could feed all the people on the planet, but we don't. Greed is our biggest issue, but over-population adds symptoms to that disease. What would ever happen if the warmongers in African landed nuclear warheads? I'm excluding North Korea from this subject as I am sure someone would bring it up. They're idiots. Both the North Korean dictator and all the battle hardened war lords throughout the entire African continent. Starvation and the demand for respect is their motive. And it'll get worse there and elsewhere when we start running out of things that are essential. Like water. Fresh clean water is not as plentiful as you may think. Add to that the non-essential things many are dependent on, such as fossil fuels, over-population may not be the biggest threat of today, but it sure as hell will be tomorrow. I'm just calling it before it happens.

Hence the initial statement to make this birth manipulation an actual thing until space is more accessible.

As for the genetics, yes, I said it was random chance as to the materials a child will take from either parent, but that doesn't change the fact that that child will carry markers that could make them smarter, stronger, or have a more fortified immune system that could be activated through genetic manipulation at a later point.

I.e. you carry the genetic material of a person with a developed metabolic system and a defined musculature, they can be activated later in your linage through genetic alteration of a fetus.
User avatar #132 to #124 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
Also, if you haven't, you should read George Orwell's 1984 or watch the movie... or play half-life 2 (i believe it's kinda based on the book)
User avatar #130 to #124 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
there's a high rate of people not having childrens in a lot of european countries, i understand what you are saying, water can be treated (it's obviously not as cost effective as taking clean water for a natural watersource).
Fosil fuels are past their time, the world would run normally without it. the only reason we're still using them so much is because people with money and power made a big investment in them.
A very big reason as to why population is growing so fast is because life expectancy grew a lot in the last 150-200 years.
Having a birth policy and genetic manipulation are two different things
Why create a selective master race... when if given equal rights and opportunities we can all achieve the same, we don't all have to be Albert Einstein or Stephen Hawking's or Michael phelps or Usain Bolt.... For Einstein to eat someone has to breed the cows, someone has to tend the crops, for him to have running water at his house someone has to work the water plant, would you work as a janitor if you could run 100 meters in 9.72 seconds and/or your IQ was over 160?
You can't have only a master race, someone has to do the dirty work, i'm not saying those jobs lack pride/respect any job for wich you put your effort be it physically or mentaly is something to be proud of, i'm just saying that some people have more capacity to do certain things and that is a good thing.
User avatar #141 to #130 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
I have read and saw the movie adaptation to 1984, and played Half Life 2. I thoroughly enjoy George Orwell, H.G. Wells, Larry Niven, Isaac Asimov, and an assortment of science fiction authors and video games.

And along the same lines of food production, just because we can feed the entire planet, doesn't mean the world is willing to pay it forward. Hence the bit about greed. And yes, the human life expectancy has grown substantially. I know that. I'm not trying to go for a master race either, that will make me sound like Hitler. And I am not a fan of Communism as seen in practice or Fascism. I am however a fan of global governing and Socialism. I only suggest trimming the fat, so to speak.

Look at the animals you consume, well, more often than not, you can't. It's pre-packaged meat from an animal bred and fed to perfection. But a lot of people don't seem to care about that. Do you hold yourself to some higher pedestal than these animals? I mean, sure, you might be self aware and intellectually defined, but you can be improved just as they and the fruit or vegetables you eat have been over the centuries.

People are so afraid of things like this, and whenever previously voicing my opinion, I am told that I am a little Hitler, as if I had proposed a totalitarian government hell bent of the destruction of tubby wubbies everywhere. I myself am large, at 5'10" and 230 pounds, I am referred to as obese. But I used to work out a lot and was quite strong but have since let myself go since I put that behind me. I would be more than willing to subject myself to the blunt end of such an idea by never having children if this proposal was taken seriously.

Again, I'm not suggesting a master race, nor a totalitarian government order, but a linked global economy and government system that consists of the best traits humanity has to offer, from all races or ethnic backgrounds that build to immortalize the human civilization across the cosmos.
User avatar #147 to #141 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
First of all.. You being fat wont make your kids fat... unless you have tiroid problems(idk if that's the word in english). What you're saying about not having children because you let yourself go is stupid in that perspective your parents should be fat and according to your ideals you should not have been born, think about it that way.
The goverment you're suggesting is that of Star Trek (i know it sounds nerdy). Each person working the job that best suits their abilities.
If you like Sci-Fi and the works of the mind i highly recomend Ray Bradbury, specially Martian Chronichles (very related to this conversation).
Animals aren't breed with the best food, as someone living in the country that suppousedly produces some of the best meat worldwide it shames me to admit that they use a lot of steroids in order to make them fatter.
would you like your DNA toyed with and a diet of chemicals in order to become the best that you can be in an unnatural way? I believe one of the most enjoyable parts of life is ******* up and learning from mistakes, overcoming our weakness via trial and error, i'm not saying ignorance is bliss, i'm just saying that becoming non-ignorant trhu any life expirience is much better than being born with "perfect" genes.

This is from SC2-HOTS this creature is a primal zerg, he collects essense that he uses to evolve constantly, at one point, kerrigan tells him that he could be perfect if he could get some protoss essense mixed up with him, he (obssessed as he is with essense) tells her that the only perfection about him is the fact that he'll never be perfect, he's constantly becoming a better being.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH9qg1_QROs
User avatar #159 to #147 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
Me being chubby, not fat, I'm not quite there may not mean that my children will be, but my body structure is that of my father and many of my ancestors, large. Body type is genetic, body weight isn't so much, but metabolism relies on many genetic markers. I'm not blaming that for my weight, I stopped working out and so I stopped burning calories, so I gain weight. That's what happens when you get out of high school a lot of the time. But a person who is tall will pass genetic material that could lead to tall offspring just as someone who is a weight lifter can pass material better suited to gaining and lifting weight. I realize weightlifting is something people do in life and isn't genetic, as most can do it, but the ability to pack on more muscular weight and lift more easily is genetic. You can be built like a bull or a giant, maybe Aquaman too (I keep referencing Michael Phelps for a reason).

Since I think you may be familiar with a variety of science fiction based on your suggestions, I will let you know that the Ancients from the Stargate universe are a tier four civilization, the majority of Star Trek is based a type three (I believe) kind of civilization, and Halo's UNSC and Covenant are tier two, I get that from the Kardashev Scale, Google it if you're curious. The government I suggest is that of a type one civilization, we at the moment aren't even on the scale and measure at .78. But a type one civilization maintains control of a planet and begins exploring beyond. Eh. A bit of a rant, but whatever.

I am saying that be breed and feed animals today so that they are way beyond what they were originally for the sole purpose of eating them. We breed them using specific genetic markers and feed them food they wouldn't normally eat so that they will fit the niche we need to have a fit for. Why is it so wrong to do it for us too?

And this is what it looks like to max out the comment text limit... I will continue.
User avatar #161 to #159 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
My DNA cannot be altered. But if I had the choice to modify and ensure that my child was build with the best parts and didn't have asthma or near-sightedness, or any possibility of heart disease or cancer, hell yes I would take it.

I get that the best things in life are best learned first hand, and that doesn't have to be an idea that is thrown out the window. We document everything today. You can see thousands of movies with the same premise or read any book and learn that being an asshole will only lead to trouble, but it still happens. People learn their lessons, and ignorance is bliss. People must learn from their mistakes. However, if you had the best parts from your ancestors, and were built to be the best that you could be, then learn your lessons and be better. A person wouldn't necessarily be born perfect, but they'd be born better suited to something than what random chance could create.
User avatar #162 to #161 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
Random chance created us. (ponder about that)

I'll check that scael it seems fairly interesting.

You'd alter the DNA of your child, what if, by making him immune to a certain disease makes him more likely to get other diseases?
You can't toy with DNA, it's too complex to make a sure assumption, you can alter it but the huge chain of outcomes that could happen make it too chaotic, we're not plants nor animal, we're far too complex, the fact that we rationalize is what makes us different and the human brain is not something you can copy in a virtual level, you could in an organic way, but the virtual part of the brain is imposible to re-create.
(virtual = memory, feelings, etc...)
User avatar #163 to #162 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
We were created by chaos. But we don't have to let chaos be our only path through evolution. I am a supporter of human cloning too. We could even build near perfect soldiers. But that's another discussion.

I get that DNA is complex and it is something to be careful of when it comes to manipulating it. But I'm not suggesting it happens immediately. I've said that we should only make sure certain genetic markers aren't passed anymore through exclusive selective breeding. The part about genetic manipulation was for a later date, when it was more feasible, as I mentioned. Later in our time, we will be able to activate certain genetic variables of a fetus to ensure specific traits of our offspring. So I don't suggest skipping the trial and error and testing phase of experimentation, it's just human beings won't allow that at this point. Human cloning is illegal, and animal testing is highly frowned upon.

I believe science is our future. I look at science fiction and dream. Tv shows and movies or video games like Stargate, Doctor Who, Halo, Star Wars, and Mass Effect make me dream of bigger and better things. But we can't get there under the philosophy that we aren't animals. We are. We may not have much for instincts anymore, but we are just an advanced species of ape. We are the greatest ape. We're smart, have emotion, and are self aware. With those three things, we've conquered the entire planet, are pushing on the ceiling to our home world, and selectively breed our food to near perfection, and yet, many people view what I'm saying as insane.

Or my favorite line, "Who are you to play God?" To that, I usually say, "Why play God when we could be Gods?"
User avatar #164 to #163 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
Well, what you are saying does make you sound a little like hitler.
But even tho i understand what you're saying, you need to look at this from a moral point of view, would you rather have asmha? or to have never being born?
Testing in human beings as we test on animals? like on death row prisioners or volunteers? would you volunteer for the better of mankind to something that could cost you your health or your life? it hurts me that they use animals for testing, but i admit i see it as a nessesary evil, as some things need to be tested in order to get to the desired result, and why animals and not people? because we can rationalize, yes an animal feels pain, and animal knows it's locked away, but the animal doesn't know what's going on, as smart as some animals can be, they don't know they are subjects of experimentation, also they don't talk back, and tell scientist how ****** up they are for doing what they are doing (as you can see i have an inner battle about this subject.
Why be god, when god is merely a human invention? what is a bible but the most read book in history? what is the chcurch other than a buissnes company?
Who are you, or me or anyone in the world to decide the fate of others? would you like to live in a "No questions asked" perfect civilization?
Chaos created us, and no it's not the only path, but what you're suggesting would make us lose that wich makes us human, our love for ourselves and the love and need of love to/from others.
User avatar #167 to #164 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
I would rather not have asthma, but have been born.

When I mentioned experimentation, I hoped to go down this line of discussion on testing on animals, but intended to discuss testing on human clones. More specifically, the embryo or fetus of the clone. From there you can activate or deactivate variable genetic markers and once deemed fit, test the fetus in life. See how it grows, matures, is born, and the child as it ages into adulthood. A clones lifespan is much shorter than the average persons, but it could work in much the same way. And I don't suggest caging the person or persons, but rather integrating them into society, and letting them see the world they live in as a gesture to their help in making humanity better. They could learn, play, and do whatever everyone else does, and I would hope without discrimination.

Eh, I don't understand why I am supposed to sound like Hitler. He was insane. He slaughtered millions of innocent people on the basis of their religion and his own mental disorders. He was a sociopath and a psychopath who thought blonde hair and blue eyes was the next big thing. What I am suggesting is the accumulated greatness of the entire human race given to every single individual.

If you couldn't tell, I'm not religious. The use of that statement was to essentially mortify the religious persons that most often argue (fairly loudly) against what I am simply proposing. I mean, it's not like I haven't looked into it, read about studies on the fringes of human morality, and actually compiled legitimate thoughts and options on the subject, while more often than not that happens to be their closing statement before finally scoffing at me, calling me little Hitler, and stopping away while blowing hot air out of their nose.

To discuss moral obligations when on the fringes of science and discovery for the sake of our entire species is unfair. Kill a thousand to save a billion or have them all die?
User avatar #168 to #167 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
What do you think stem cells are? they are studies done with fetuses and the likes.

Also perhaps, a clone could be seing as a gifted life, but does that give us the right to experiment on it? wouldn't it makes us like all the bad things we say about god?

Well i'm not saying you are exactly like hitler, i'm just saying that seeking to create a better race by eliminating what makes us weak is kinda what he aimed to. ( to his standars as stupid as we may see them)

I've read three bibles, in order to learn more about religion, non convinced me about the existance of god or any of the things they speak off.

You are implying we're doomed, when you're speaking of a time so far from now that you can not estimate the changes be it technological, organical or by mere chance that can occure in that spasm of time from now to then.
User avatar #169 to #168 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
Exactly, we already experiment on human fetuses, so why's that so different from more severe tests on cloned fetuses? And I mean, I don't suggest extreme experimentation of clones throughout their life, only through cloned fetuses themselves, when they are a cluster of cells. I do suggest running tests and simulations on clones through their lives, to see how on par they may be against the best of the best nature has to offer. And then looking into the body once they are deceased. I am an organ donor, and will submit my body to science once I die, why not? So it isn't like that isn't something I wouldn't do myself. I think if we were to let the clones know what they are, who they are, and allow them to see the world, many wouldn't object either. I wouldn't, not in my current state of mind.

We very well could be doomed. As of now, humanity doesn't even rank on the Kardashev Scale, we are so early in our lives as a species. If our planet was uninhabitable, we'd all be dead, gone, and withered to dust and fossils before anything could ever really come out of us that contributes to our universe. The men and women in space right now would starve to death in an aluminum and carbon alloy box, watching as their entire race burned to a smoldering crisp. One nuclear warhead, super volcanic eruption, colossal solar flare, or big rock that hits our planet would wipe us out or at the very least bring us to the brink of extinction.

I don't want that. I would rather we have the best minds available setting forward to push humanity into eternity. By advancing as quickly as possible. If we could reach a tier two civilization, we would achieve that immortality. And it's like you said about experimenting on animals, it would be a necessary evil. Would it be socially acceptable now? Probably not, but I don't feel comfortable knowing that we could all be gone in a weeks time, if something catastrophic happened.
User avatar #170 to #169 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
Being an organ donor is not the same as being a live experiment subject AT ALL.
there's a german movie about a simple psychological experiment called "the experiment" look it up it's great.

We could be extinct any second froma variation of so many things that we can not even calculate it, we agree on this point, but you have to keep in mind that in order to get were we are now as a species all this factors are yet to take place, so maybe there's nothing to be afraid off, also "if a tree falls in a wood..."

You have the best minds, and most scientists are good people, it's obvious that intelligence isn't the same as knowing how to take advantage (i.e. politicians buissnesmen, etc...).
I believe that life is great, and i'd love to live an eternal healthy life in a changing and varied ambierment, but geat minds have agreed about this being not true and deemed inmortality as something that would eventually become boring.
what could we posibly do if the sun consumes itself? could we survive the cold? the dying of most vegetable life, proceeded by the deaths of most animal life? the water freezing? could technology really prepare us for such a cathastrophy? what if a meteorite the size of the moon came to earth, could we nuke it into a million pieces? would that save us? how about greenhouse effect, could we live in a waterworld? with such high temperatures? what if the earths core explodes? there's so many things we as a species are so tiny compared to, that i believe it is best not to think about this things and just live and enjoy our short but fullfilling lives.
User avatar #160 to #159 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
i'll wait for the cont.
User avatar #171 to #160 - hugejuggernaut (04/27/2013) [-]
I couldn't reply anymore.

I realize being an organ donor isn't the same as live experimentation. I don't suggest that, again, live testing however, absolutely.

I have a girlfriend, finally re-enrolled in college, and ditched my 10 1/2 a day job that consisted of hard labor in extreme conditions. I'm moving into a new home with my girlfriend, and am seeing my bestfriend off to the Marine Corps in a few weeks. I live life, and I enjoy my life. But I never stop thinking that this life that I live could be over in an instant.

I wouldn't want my children to have that fear. So I would rather they lived in a large span of human civilization linked through the proper blend of capitalist and socialist economic and governmental systems. A place where we gain power through the planet itself, and offer electricity for free. Where human beings live on the moon, are terraforming Mars and Venus, and are preparing to build a Dyson Sphere or are leaving the solar system. A place where they don't have to worry about getting heart problems from me or cancer from their potential mothers side of genetics. I want to live in the world of science fiction, but the majority of what they consist of are contradictory to today's moral standards. That upsets me.
User avatar #172 to #171 - GnRNoD (04/27/2013) [-]
This kind of perfection, seems nice and all, but the fact that we don't have it yet just gives us something to look forward of our future as a species, i mean, try thinking about what technologies existed 200 years ago... or even 300 and then think about 50 years ago and then 20 then 10 then look up what has been invented/studied in the past month... you'll love that, perhaps you should consider getting involved in some researchs or something of the likes (if your age/studies) permit it, and be the one that gets us closer to that change you want, the fact that you could do this is what makes life so great, constantly thinking how the world could end tomorrow is only going to upset you, just think about it this way, if does, who's going to be left to care?
User avatar #86 to #64 - sketchysketchist (04/27/2013) [-]
I think because before there was nothing else for women to do besides get married and get pregnant.
Now there's feminazis complaining how women who have sex instead of going to school and work are just sluts being controlled by the man.
And it became a new norm in society.
User avatar #76 to #64 - dedaluminus (04/27/2013) [-]
It's been the norm because there were no other options available. Nowadays, people shouldn't have children until they at least have half a clue about the world and the means to support themselves. We don't need everyone breeding so we can beat the odds on the black death anymore.
#74 to #64 - restfullwicked ONLINE (04/27/2013) [-]
i understand what you mean but it is less acceptable in our lifestyles today.
some girls become fertile at 13 or even younger, 400 years ago they would have been married and having kids, it is now against the law in all "civilised" countries for this to happen.
also those were married and doing their duty to their families, not random sluts trying to be popular.
#73 to #64 - ungabunga (04/27/2013) [-]
Because teens these days are too ******* stupid to raise kids. Though that's because in this society we force them into a school system that reiterates the procedure by which 1 + 1 = 2 for 12 goddam years because one slow ****** in the class can't get left behind and apparently the only way to fix his self esteem is to adjust the system so that nobody can learn in the institution they're legally required to attend.
 Friends (0)