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 wonder something and I'm not saying its correct but........
Along time ago and far far away...he he!
People knew their place in life, women were masters of their home, came out of hiding during the war to work but went back when the men returned, not a great life and I would argue in their favor but it wasn't questioned because that was their place.
Men worked hard or were the brains of the operation and that was their place, many died young in the work place, saw in the movies it was acceptable to hit women and they were accepted for what they were and could have pride in that because they were acceptable rolls in society.
Today what is your place? where do you fit in? Could it be that although unpleasant as it was it was an easier choice back then when it was expected of us to walk in a road already chosen than to pick our own?
I wonder something and I'm not saying its correct but........
Along time ago and far far away...he he!
People knew their place in life, women were masters of their home, came out of hiding during the war to work but went back when the men returned, not a great life and I would argue in their favor but it wasn't questioned because that was their place.
Men worked hard or were the brains of the operation and that was their place, many died young in the work place, saw in the movies it was acceptable to hit women and they were accepted for what they were and could have pride in that because they were acceptable rolls in society.
Today what is your place? where do you fit in? Could it be that although unpleasant as it was it was an easier choice back then when it was expected of us to walk in a road already chosen than to pick our own?
Your post takes this thread in an ugly direction. I'm not even going there. It's offensive on so many levels.
I have to say that this does not describe me at all. I'm happy with what I have, and don't feel a constant need to make things "better." I'm happy where I am, love my job, and just in general, love my life.
I'm not saying this to brag. I feel this way because I'm grateful and happy for what I have.
Oh no, I'm not saying nobody on earth can be happy. And it's awesome that you have a great life. What I'm saying is that if there weren't a high enough percentage of those who inherently wanted to change/improve/investigate new avenues in all different areas of life, then we wouldn't be the human species; we would not move forward as, throughout history, we have tended to do.
A high enough percentage of the human species is comprised of innovators, to have moved us along to where we are now (again, for good or ill; I'm not making a judgment either way). If we as a whole had always been happy in a generally good circumstance, we would never have moved out of the trees. (So to speak.)
But yes, it's wonderful when people can generally be happy. I know that even when I'm happy, I'll never be quite "satisfied"...or, never quite "done". There will always be the new thing I'll want to try to improve upon things. So I don't think this is any worse than the situation of a happy person, either. I think of it as continuing a long line of family innovators (I'm not bragging either--again, the flip side is dissatisfaction, though as I said, not general unhappiness). And I do feel that people who are generally wired this way, tend to also feel this way about their personal circumstances and, often, their relationships. Even if only from their side of things.
This may not be what the OP was getting at, and the idea is usually, "Oh, if only we could all just be happy", but I'm putting forth a solid biological reason why not everyone can, and why we wouldn't even be typing on these keyboards right now if everyone could.
Your post takes this thread in an ugly direction. I'm not even going there. It's offensive on so many levels.
Claire I would never for a moment say it was acceptable but...did we have to know what are place was and is everyone capable of knowing what that place is?
I wonder something and I'm not saying its correct but........
Along time ago and far far away...he he!
People knew their place in life, women were masters of their home, came out of hiding during the war to work but went back when the men returned, not a great life and I would argue in their favor but it wasn't questioned because that was their place.
Men worked hard or were the brains of the operation and that was their place, many died young in the work place, saw in the movies it was acceptable to hit women and they were accepted for what they were and could have pride in that because they were acceptable rolls in society.
Today what is your place? where do you fit in? Could it be that although unpleasant as it was it was an easier choice back then when it was expected of us to walk in a road already chosen than to pick our own?
It is always a tradeoff. When you're completely safe in your knowledge of your place in the world, then yes, you're completely safe, which can make one feel secure. But if one wants to go beyond limits, even if they're just personal limits, in a circumstance like the one you describe above, then yes, there's risk.
So there you have it. Do I like it or hate it? I don't know. I do know I would not have had some insecurities if life were still so cut and dry (although historically it never quite was...but I'll leave that alone for now). But I also know that I never would have seen the things I've seen, done the things I've done or had the choices I've had.
Biggest problem in my eyes is that people seek their happiness in other people and in acquiring inanimate objects. Happiness is a state of mind you get by yourself. I'm not saying that the "other people and inanimate objects" part of the equation needs to be eliminated, I'm just saying that they will not have a material affect on your personal satisfaction in life.
I have a close family member (female) who has pinned every duty of making her "happy" squarely on the shoulders of her DH (and a bit on ther own kids). She is obsessed with trying to buy a showy, obnoxious estate with sprawling acres in prime areas where she could ill afford a condo. She has already purchased the vulgar furniture (immitation rococo) for the whole "chateau" she plans to set up. And as the years fly by and she (well, actually her DH, since she hasn't worked a day since 1998) still can't afford to create her cinderella life and her kids are soon going to be flying the coop. Each time I see her, the furrows in ther forehead and crows feet are setting deeper and deeper, she makes more and more negative comments (borderline insults) to those around her, where she's basically become a wet blanket. Irony - she considers herself "happy" and goes around trying to prove to everyone how idyllic her life is. She fools no one and actually comes off as quite bitter and delusional to everyone around her.
The point of my anecdote is that even if and when she "has it all", she will still have the same problems in her life that make her unhappy - hubby working long hours, kids getting on her nerves, etc. etc. I think she may just "snap" when the rugrats spoil one of her phony period pieces or when she takes off the blinders and sees her DHs philandering.
Oh! Wait! You did ask whether it was easier back then. Yes and no, for the reasons I described in my post above.
First of all, life in the time periods I think you're referring to--particularly the post-WWII era--was never ever as cut-and-dry as we'd like to believe today. I think there's a book called "The Way We Weren't"--it's about exactly that subject.
Second of all, the people who were most satisfied with society overall then were the people who fit in perfectly due to their birth, education, looks, basic personality, the correct race and nationality, and had a lack of that elusive "gene" that seems to make many of us want to move along and discover new things. But, the truth? That describes the people who were most satisfied in every generation.
It's just that the other ninety percent of the world tends to feel somewhat less privileged. Again...that's where change comes in. The "good old days" weren't--any more than they are today. Our grandchildren will look back on us one day with a wistful sigh and wish they could be so cartoon-book clear as our histories will by then seem to them.
Oh! Wait! You did ask whether it was easier back then. Yes and no, for the reasons I described in my post above.
First of all, life in the time periods I think you're referring to--particularly the post-WWII era--was never ever as cut-and-dry as we'd like to believe today. I think there's a book called "The Way We Weren't"--it's about exactly that subject.
Second of all, the people who were most satisfied with society overall then were the people who fit in perfectly due to their birth, education, looks, basic personality, the correct race and nationality, and had a lack of that elusive "gene" that seems to make many of us want to move along and discover new things. But, the truth? That describes the people who were most satisfied in every generation.
It's just that the other ninety percent of the world tends to feel somewhat less privileged. Again...that's where change comes in. The "good old days" weren't--any more than they are today. Our grandchildren will look back on us one day with a wistful sigh and wish they could be so cartoon-book clear as our histories will by then seem to them.
Was it great...probably not, but if you don't have anything to compare it to its acceptable and not questioned so you didn't dwell on it. Today you can go in a million different directions so the choices are vast. I remember when economically I wasn't stable and my dad said how does it feel with your wife doing well and your not holding up your end thinking wow!, is that how it is? because my wife wasn't acting that way. His generation I guess! Today has got to be even harder for people.
Well survey say that like 57% are staisfied with their life.IMO the others are dissatified with themselves really.
Yes, definitely. But all change starts from within--even social change. If a person uses his or her dissatisfaction constructively, then it is by no means a waste.
For example, Salk developed the polio vaccine due to deeply personal experiences. All around him was the devastation of polio. He could have said that he himself was basically happy in his home life and therefore, let God sort out the rest. But the degree to which it bothered him--his own emotional responses to it, a personal unhappiness about it--caused him to create something that would help save a generation.
Saxon-era Europe could have remained satisfied with human-drawn ploughs. They worked, after all. They did make the whole process harder, therefore longer and more drawn out; hence, already-furrowed land tending to be re-used, until that area was depleted. But the ones who were at first called the whining grumblers and later called geniuses stole an idea from Rome and started having oxen, and then heavy work horses, pull deeper furrows, make things faster and therefore, be able to let the land take turns and recover--and there ended up being a whole lot more food.
Gloria Steinem could have married and settled down and had a fun early-60s secure life. Why did she grumble and groan? Why wasn't she satisfied with what she saw as the "treatment" of women? That chick was beautiful enough to be a Playboy bunny (and for a time period for the sake of investigation, she was). All her current faults aside, I'm rather glad every time I get a paycheck that Gloria Steinem was unhappy.
Simple math has always been easy enough to do on a piece of paper. Or even slate. Why on earth do we need computers? Actually, why do we even have one? Because an 18th century genius put forth a theory based on his desire to know more, more more, to always know more...If he had been generally satisfied, he would not have bothered trying to find a "better" way.
The Wright Brothers could have stayed on the ground. What's so boring about life on the ground? Why on earth would anyone suffer incredible failures and setbacks on the way toward trying to get into the air?
People who are "unhappy" in relationships can moan and groan and cry about it. But they can also learn a million new things about themselves because of it. They can become more interesting, more learned and more helpful (to other) couples because of it. Be grateful to the unhappy people. They may or may not be teaching themselves new lessons. And by your watching, you are certainly learning new lessons.
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.
But, the truth? That describes the people who were most satisfied in every generation.
Again...that's where change comes in. The "good old days" weren't--any more than they are today. Our grandchildren will look back on us one day with a wistful sigh and wish they could be so cartoon-book clear as our histories will by then seem to them.
