Plural marriages, involving 14-17 year olds and married women, aren't even close to the societal "norm" (but neither was lying about it...or seer stone fraud, or banking fraud that leads to bankruptcy, or copying masonic rituals, or falsely translating plates and funeral papyri, or destroying printing presses, or adultery, and so forth).
The problem with getting into any kind of discussion with you people is that you constantly shift ground. It is pointless, tedious, and frustrating to try to reason to a conclusion, because you constantly respond with non sequiturs. The issue was not plural marriage, but whether teenage girls commonly got married in the 19th century. They did. The mean age was much lower then than it is now, meaning that there were more teenagers getting married. If the mean age was 20, then there were just as many teenagers getting married as women over 20.
I’m done with you.