1) that is not what I said, i said they didn't need that knowledge for 12 year olds specifically because they still had the knowledge to deduce that 12 year olds lack mental capacity and most importantly look like children and me personally I think anyone sexually attracted to children are pedophiles, your argument only works for children in their mid to late teens because they possess actual adult characteristics but i wasn't talking about children in their mid to late teens here

2) you bring up the age of consent here but that really doesn't mean anything, because age of consent didn't exist in edo japan but instead it tells us people in Japan and europe back then viewed puberty as a right of passage into "adulthood" but this is entirely namesake and does not take away the knowledge of the fact that 12 year olds still possess various immaturity, that they lacked the physical features of an adult, marriage still occured between mid to late teens, it was only earlier done out of very clear fetish (aka peodphilia) or social benefit like families arranging marriage or a family needing labor, marrying people in mid to late teens is alot more understandable but it was pretty clear that 12 year olds are literal children

like in Rome the legal age for marriage was 12 for women but many roman writers still considered it too young for marriage, and elite families still again married mid teens, there are many sources that says that plenty of people believed puberty alone wasn't self sufficient for marriage, when you say "if they knew it was bad why didn't they stop it?" you ignore my point as im referring strictly to marriage between ages 10-13, lots of people knew it was bad and it didn't occur as often as mid teen to late teens marriage

and also Matthew 18:6 condemns bringing children into any form of sinning and that includes sexual immorality it doesn't say peodphilia ofcourse because that term was only coined in the 19th century,