Schooldays

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 55584

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Patricia Bullington-McGuire
<patricia at o...> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2003, Steve wrote:

> > 
> > bboy_mn:
> > Remember that Wizards live about twice as long as Muggles, so in
> > Muggle years (relative to a muggle lifespan) Molly is between 35
> > and 40 years old. So yes, I believe she could easily have a 10 
> > year old kid. 

> Patricia:
> 
> ... Since we know Arthur and Molly were together while still in 
> school, assuming they are 70ish now would raise the question of why 
> they waited so long (mid-40s) to start their family.  ..edited..
> 

bboy_mn:

Why not? Lots of women today wait until later in life to have kids.
Our next door neighbors when I was a kid were in their earily 60's and
they had a youngest daughter who was 10. These things happen.

While waiting isn't the most common way to go today, it is a way that
many people do choose to go. There could be lots of explainations for
the Weasleys. Maybe Molly and Arthur were wild and partied all the
time when they were young, so they put off having kids. Maybe when
Arthur was young, he was like Percy, and he spent all his time
concentrating on work. There could be lots of explanations.



> Patricia:
> ... If we just divide the ages of  magical people in half to get 
> their "muggle years" ..., then since Hogwarts students finish up at 
> age 17 or 18, most witches and wizards have finished their formal 
> educations when they are only 9ish, relatively speaking.  

bboy_mn:
You used the one word that puts it all in perspective, RELATIVE, and
the reference is relative to a normal lifespan. So to say that
students are '9ish' when they graduate does NOT define their
functional age. They still function like normal 17-18 year olds, but
relative to relative to the normal lifespan of a wizard vs a muggle,
they are 9ish. Just as a muggle 10 year old has lived about 1/10th of
a normal POTENTIAL lifespan, a wizard would have only lived about
1/20th of a normal potential lifespan.

So this 'divide in half for muggles' simple lends us a perspective;
show us where in a lifespan these people are relative to each other. 

We know that wizards and witches have a life force beyond what normal
humans do. Hagrid suggests that a car crash couldn't kill James and
Lily. Neville falls 50 feet, which would kill anyone else, and breaks
his wrist. A tiny young Neville is dropped out of a second story
window on his head, and is unhurt.

One could assume, that witches have magical mean of dealing with
sexual issues like birth control. With magic, I would have to assume
that birth control is very easy and very safe. As magical as magic is,
I would also think they have a way of preserving or conserving eggs. 

On the other hand, based on my research, a woman has the potential to
create 400,000 usable eggs. At one a month, that adds up to a very
very long lifetime. In muggles, it's not eggs that run out, it the
deterioration of the process by which potential eggs are matured into
usable eggs. With sufficient lifeforce, vitality, and extend lifespan,
there is no reason why the process of creating mature usable eggs
shouldn't last longer.

http://biology.clc.uc.edu/courses/bio105/reproduc.htm 

So, I still see no problem with Molly having kids in her 60's. 


bboy_mn originally said:
> 
> > Logically, if they can live twice as long, the child bearing years
> > are also twices as long. At age 70, Arthur and Molly are on the 
> > low end of middle age.

> Patricia:
> 
> ...  In pre-industrial societies life spans were often half of what 
> they are now in industrialized countries. 
> 
> ...edited...

bboy_mn:
That's because of sanitation, diet, and disease. Those people who died
young still had a potential lifespan of 100 years; that biological
capability was there. It was external circumstance that prematurely
shorten that lifespan potential.

While I respect your alternate view, I still stand by what I
originally said, and I think the evidence is there to support it.

Just an opinion.

bboy_mn