and fortunately, i'm not a liberal

Yes you are

stop lying

just because it was done historically doesn't make it beneficial

i'm mostly pre-modernist you stupid wanker

It is beneficial if you want the best for eugenics

eugenics has been debunked by biology

HAHA

ohboy

and no, the survivability rates are far lower

eugenics is bullshit

as is most forms of ""biology"" toted by edgy paedos on the internet

Yea, 16 is probably prime age tbqh

bred at 15

no

birth at 16

and why do you say bred

that's regarded as creepy even by premodernist standards

stats show that 16 year olds make healthy babies

because it's lowering the person to the status of an animal for sex

First of all, let's state that people before our times, in which the age of consent has been raised, they married people of their age, or close to their age, and even if they married old people such thing was seen as pretty bad, and I love Cranach's pictorial critique of it. And then, marrying them did not equate consummating the marriage immediately, in cases of a fairly different age most men or women did not consummate their marriage soon.

which was not done towards women historically

16 year olds make energetic mothers with healthy children

16 year olds make energetic mothers with healthy children

16 year olds make energetic mothers with healthy children16 year olds make energetic mothers with healthy children

no they don't

They do

Show me otherwise

16 year olds often make shit mothers

i don't have to prove a negative

it's called burden of proof retard

kek

Post-partum depression is higher among teenagers.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219236/

burden of proof is millions of years of evolution doing it that way

here's a nice study

So no, they are not more energetic.

'evolution' didn't do it that way

what are you basing that on

If that is a factor, it's because it's not socially accepted

They have to attend school etc.