Only if they survive until birth.
Comment on Rough time to be a woman. ☕
gibmiser@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Having 4 babies in 1 year in the 1800s had to be quite the achievement
EyIchFragDochNur@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Comment on Rough time to be a woman. ☕
gibmiser@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Having 4 babies in 1 year in the 1800s had to be quite the achievement
Only if they survive until birth.
tanisnikana@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Not impossible though. Two in January, two in November.
victorz@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Or just the four of them together in one go I guess.
homes@piefed.world 4 weeks ago
Regardless of which way it happened, I’d be crying a lot, especially if it happened in the 1800s.
db2@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
In the 1800s you’d be counting yourself lucky you survived it.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 4 weeks ago
Food was much cheaper and you were allowed to put them to work right away.
Plus most of them died before five anyways.
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Or triplets in January and one in November, or one in January and triplets in November (but it was definitely these two months). She’s crazy; capable of anything.
M137@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Heck, you could even have 2,5 and then 1,5. Just that the chance of long term survival for them would be way less.
Lumisal@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Or 6 at once but 2 didn’t make it
pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de 4 weeks ago
Or octuplets born on new year’s eve so half were in one year and half were in the next.
victorz@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Now we’re going into bitch territory. 🐕
Mac@mander.xyz 4 weeks ago
I knew a set of quads in school. They were all really cool.
victorz@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Nice! Identical or fraternal?
cattywampas@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Irish quadruplets?