5 ms·
I think if you are going to force the boys to serve in your military in order to further your conquest, you would probably not equip them with armor. Most of t
by themaninthedark 2y ago
I think if you are going to force the boys to serve in your military in order to further your conquest, you would probably not equip them with armor.
Most of the anecdotes that I remember seem to suggest that you kill the men and boys as a boy will grow up to be a man who remembers what you did to him.
- bluGill 2y agoMore importantly (but even more unpleasant to think about) is boys grow up to want women, so by killing the boys you get more girls for your harem. (it would not be unusual for a 45 year old man to take a 14 year old girl). Girls from your tribe probably get some protection from the worst of this, but girls (and women) you capture from a different tribe are your to enjoy in whatever way you want.
- hammock 2y agoA less cynical version of the same point is that fertile women are vital to the continuation of a tribe, while boys are expendable (and most valuable in war, verily)
- isk517 2y agoI wonder how much was about building a harem compared to replacing women lost during childbirth.
- o11c 2y agoWe should be careful about statistics for "age at first marriage". Common flaws are to look only at "nobles" (who marry for political reasons), to look at the lowest recorded/permitted age as if it were typical, and to assume when menarche happens (which depends highly on nutrition). But one way or another, polygyny must necessarily be linked with killing men. The birth ratio is practically fixed in the absence of sex-selective abortion.
- ants_everywhere 2y ago> you would probably not equip them with armor yeah that's possible. I just meant to say if there is armor, it would be smaller