Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are over romanticizing an era and overlooking some truly horrible stuff that went on, all under the guise of 'civility'....and nothing to do with actual politeness. I'll gladly take modern life....with all it's current challenges....over fake rules and mores. (Your idea of being married and 'calling on your husband' in his own room so as not to mess up your bed...ah...that strikes of a mental disorder.)
Dress up if you want....beat your children to obey your every word, look down your nose at those that aren't of your social class and standing and keep your husband at arms length so you don't have to deal with intimacy. No one is stopping you, but thankfully the rest of us don't have to be like you.
You are over-generalizing, to a nonsensical degree, your claimed social complaints for the time to the OP's longed-for social norms.
Has the elimination of the social norms mentioned by the OP led to a decrease in a single ONE of the complaints that you have mentioned? Nope! In fact, I could make a convincing argument that some of the complaints that you mention are actually worse, today, in our era of reduced social formality that is undeniably accomanied by reduced family success.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1986pacecar
Calling Ward Cleaver! So, you want to live in the 50's? Don't romanticize a decade that included overt racism, McCarthy era paranoia, a real threat of nuclear war, rampant sexual discrimination, polio, J Edgar Hoover, party lines, etc.. Sure, we have our share of problems now but manners and dress aren't quite up there with the above mentioned.
You forgot sunspots, the devil, smallpox, and Napolean.
Seriously, your diatribe reads poorly. Ignoring the strangely attempted ad-hominem (ad-hominems are always bad form-why don't people get that 14 years into the internet conversation?), as if Ward Cleaver isn't a good albeit two-dimensional role model, none of your attempted associations make a lick of sense. Eschewing the social norms that the OP longs for hasn't a single thing to do with your particular devils (polio being my favorite for its specific nonsensical correlation). As was the case with the first quoted poster, none of the OPs lamentations have a single correlation to your social (lol...and medical) complaints. Also, most are still around in full force; some in different forms. That fact erodes the foundation of your protest completely.
The real foundation of your protests is that you guys/gals just enjoy less social structure, consequences be damned. Yes, impulse control is difficult. Sometimes we don't feel like being polite or following more strict social norms but, personally, I find that the absence of many of the social ills that we've taken on since the relaxation of 1950's style social norms to be preferable to the current gross state of affairs. Using the inevitable and lazy "but racism" card is an extreme cop-out and zero excuse. Every single one of the OP's laments has nothing to do with the presence or absence of racism. In fact, all communities would undeniably be better off with more social stucture and discipline in this day.
As an aside, McCarthy was undeniably correct. Soviet spies had fully infiltrated the government, period. End of story. This is well documented. "McCarthism" is merely a derision invented by those who stood to be outed by McCarthy. No modern historian can use the term in a legitmate manner, and neither should any American that has a shred of academic/historical, political, or patriotic integrity.
You are over-generalizing, to a nonsensical degree, your claimed social complaints for the time to the OP's longed-for social norms.
Has the elimination of the social norms mentioned by the OP led to a decrease in a single ONE of the complaints that you have mentioned? Nope! In fact, I could make a convincing argument that some of the complaints that you mention are actually worse, today, in our era of reduced social formality that is undeniably accomanied by reduced family success.
You forgot sunspots, the devil, smallpox, and Napolean.
Seriously, your diatribe reads poorly. Ignoring the strangely attempted ad-hominem (ad-hominems are always bad form-why don't people get that 14 years into the internet conversation?), as if Ward Cleaver isn't a good albeit two-dimensional role model, none of your attempted associations make a lick of sense. Eschewing the social norms that the OP longs for hasn't a single thing to do with your particular devils (polio being my favorite for its specific nonsensical correlation). As was the case with the first quoted poster, none of the OPs lamentations have a single correlation to your social (lol...and medical) complaints. Also, most are still around in full force; some in different forms. That fact erodes the foundation of your protest completely.
The real foundation of your protests is that you guys/gals just enjoy less social structure, consequences be damned. Yes, impulse control is difficult. Sometimes we don't feel like being polite or following more strict social norms but, personally, I find that the absence of many of the social ills that we've taken on since the relaxation of 1950's style social norms to be preferable to the current gross state of affairs. Using the inevitable and lazy "but racism" card is an extreme cop-out and zero excuse. Every single one of the OP's laments has nothing to do with the presence or absence of racism. In fact, all communities would undeniably be better off with more social stucture and discipline in this day.
As an aside, McCarthy was undeniably correct. Soviet spies had fully infiltrated the government, period. End of story. This is well documented. "McCarthism" is merely a derision invented by those who stood to be outed by McCarthy. No modern historian can use the term in a legitmate manner, and neither should any American that has a shred of academic/historical, political, or patriotic integrity.
Gee, thanks for the condescending tone I guess you got me. I'd all but forgotten about this silly post and quite frankly wish I had. Again, my reply was simply pointing out that the era she pined for had it's share of problems that get glossed over when people think of "the good old days".
We've had a number of threads that touch upon this issue from all different perspectives, and I see them as all part of one over-arching issue: the increasing informality in our society.
Hardly anyone dresses up for things anymore.
People scoff at the idea of wearing "professional attire" to interviews and in the workplace.
Fewer people seem to care about proper language, usage, spelling, and grammar.
Too many people hug people at every greeting, even people they hardly know.
Rules for kids are more and more lax (ex. they can be picky eaters and the parents allow it).
We think nothing of seeing famous people, even our President, in very casual, even unprofessional behavior.
The whole idea of etiquette and good manners is rejected by more and more people.
Public displays of affection, even sexual affection are "normal," and if you're annoyed by them, there must eb something wrong with you.
Etc, etc, etc.
YES YES YES!
Quote:
People dressing appropriately for dinner and special events. Sure, dressing up for dinner when it's just your own nuclear family might be extreme. But if you have guests, wouldn't it be nice for everyone to dress up? I mean, show some respect for your hosts and your guests.
YES. I dressed up for Mother's Day brunch. So did my family. We were the dressiest people there. I didn't care. The moms in my life are worth it.
When I'm out and about I tend to dress casually but I don't shuffle around in dirty or revealing clothes. I also do not wear pajamas in public. When did THIS become a thing????
At work we are "business casual" and to me that means tailored slacks, closed-toe shoes without prostitute heels/platforms, and no CLEAVAGE. Minimal jewelry/perfume, conservative hairstyle/makeup. And BRUSH YOUR HAIR AND TEETH.
Quote:
People, both wealthy and poor, being taught manners, and expected to show them. Everyone called their elders and people they aren't acquainted with "Madam" and "Sir." Not "yo," "dude," or "hey you."
I "ma'am" and "sir" my elders/equals, and refer to people obviously younger than I am as "young man" or "young lady." I don't do it to be condescending...quite the opposite. What should I call a female in her late teens/early 20s other than "young lady?" "Hey you?" "Hey kid?"
Quote:
There was a nice "bubble" around people regarding physical contact. You didn't hug strangers, casual friends, or colleagues. A couple beginning to date might hold hands, or walk arm-in-arm. Of course, I don't doubt they still engaged in sex outside of marriage, but it was kept private, not on display, and not pushed out into people's faces. Public displays of affection, like excessive slurpy tongue-kissing, were considered vulgar.
As far as I'm concerned, anything beyond hand-holding, arm around the waist/shoulder, brief hugs, or pecks on the mouth or cheek is PDA and is inappropriate. Groping, extended kissing, etc. is nauseating.
Quote:
Couples might have separate bedrooms. Okay, I know I'm in the minority here, but I never saw the purpose in couples having to sleep together. Of course there's the fun stuff we all enjoy in bed. But after that's over, I'd much rather we retire to our separate beds to stretch out and be comfortable. No, we choose to get elbowed and kicked, sleeping next to someone snoring, making us hot & sweaty, and disturbing our sleep. I'd much rather have my own room, and have my husband "pay a call" on me, and then leave. Or preferably, I'd pay a call on him, and then leave, so my own bed isn't messed up.
I don't see anything wrong with this if both partners are down with it. There's no law that says a married or cohabiting couple has to share a bed or a room.
Quote:
I even like when married couples would call each other "Mr.__" and "Mrs.___." Yes, that kind of formality would be over-the-top today, but it sure seemed to help couples treat each other respectfully. Even if you get into a serious fight, you're less likely to get nasty and strike a low-blow when you're referring to your partner as "Mrs." or "Mr."
Eh...we disagree on this. If a couple wants to do that, fine; but I don't see anything crass with married people or long-term partners referring to each other by their first names only.
Quote:
In a professional setting, you would call your superior "Mr." or "Mrs." Today we call the CEO "Bob" and our immediate boss "Katie." You didn't expect the president of your company or your boss to be your buddy.
Yes, this. Whenever I start a new job, I ask my boss if he/she prefers to be called "Mr./Ms. Last Name." They always say no, but I do ask. I refer to their superiors as "Mr./Ms. so and so" unless requested by that person to use their first name. They always say "call me X." But it's their call.
Quote:
Even poor people observed certain rules & expectations of civility. It wasn't just a "snooty rich people thing." People had at least rough concepts of honor and decency. The boundaries of what each person or group considered honorable or decent or acceptable might have varied a little, but there were basic agreed-upon concepts. For example, getting into a loud argument in public would be considered embarrassing to people from every social stratum.
Yes. Manners should have nothing to do with income. I've seen rich and poor people with embarrassingly bad manners.
Quote:
Kids were expected to obey their parents and other adults in authority. They had to show respect. If your mother or father said to eat that piece of food that you dislike, you ate it. If you tried to argue, you'd experience punishment. If you acted up in school, the teachers could take action and your parents would be in full agreement. None of this meant that parents didn't love their kids as much as parents today. In fact, it shows they loved them so much that they wanted to ensure they became successful, productive, honorable citizens.
OMG YES. I'm just shy of 40 but when I was growing up, this was normal.
I too agree that a degree of formality would be welcome. Seems like "manners" have been all but forgotten. No one wants Victorian formality, but at least good manners would be refreshing today.
I too agree that a degree of formality would be welcome. Seems like "manners" have been all but forgotten. No one wants Victorian formality, but at least good manners would be refreshing today.
No, the OP wants Victorian formality....not just good manners.
You don't consider separate bedrooms for spouses to be overly Victorian?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess you got me. I'd all but forgotten about this silly post and quite frankly wish I had. Again, my reply was simply pointing out that the era she pined for had it's share of problems that get glossed over when people think of "the good old days".
Amen
