• Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    20 days ago

    I like the sentiment, but they were underage for most of there reign (14-18) so kinda ick to sexualize them

    • Beacon@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      What? No one is sexualizing them, they were sexual. They had 4 wives. They had a reputation for “sexual promiscuity”. This information is directly from the linked Wikipedia article.

    • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      “I never wanted a meme sexualizing a teenager.”

      “How about a meme validating a teenager?”

      “Aye, that I can do.”

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      19 days ago

      it’s impossible to sound like a well-adjusted human that is allowed in polite society when saying this but i still feel it has to be said: the meaning of “underage” is a legal one, not a biological one, and it varies a lot across the world. in my country, we commonly call people turning 15 “pants-age” (bad translation) because it’s the age of consent. that’s just normal here.

      assuming the rest of the world, especially when going back through history, shares 21st century north american sensibilities is not helping anyone.