I wish it was 1950.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-14-2007
I wish it was 1950.
55
Fri, 08-31-2007 - 1:07am
I was never around then, but i've heard the world was safer and the men were different. I watch those movies set in the 50's and men were actually courting women with the best of intentions. ( im sure there were still the occasional bad seeds) They wanted to get married and start families. They took women on dates, besides bars with their buddies, and kissed then goodnight without trying to get an invitation inside. I wish i was there then. Somehow...things just seemed simpler.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-16-2005
Fri, 08-31-2007 - 3:10pm
Well that's because the population is higher, it's all relative, there were plenty of places you wouldn't have slept with your doors unlocked in the 50's as well and there are places right now that you can sleep with your doors unlocked.


Edited 8/31/2007 3:12 pm ET by lovinhockey17

Smile,

Deirdre

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-26-2006
Fri, 08-31-2007 - 3:15pm
This made me think of when Michael Moore (I actually never saw whichever movie it was, I just heard about it) went up to people's doors somewhere in Canada and just walked right in.
Avatar for cl_shywon
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2003
Sat, 09-01-2007 - 10:44pm

I get what you mean.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-2007
Tue, 09-04-2007 - 11:08pm
Eh. I also know many men who married in the 50's who if you ask them today why they married they say, "Because my wife was a good woman and that's what you're supposed to do." In a way the 1950's lacked passion. There are positives and negatives to everything.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2007
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 3:21am

>>In a way the 1950's lacked passion.

Don't confuse order and structure with lack of passion. There was such a thing called family back then because people weren't as self centered and self focused as they are today.

Real passion is shared between a couple married happily for 50 years. Not those in short term romantic flings, especially abusive ones.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2005
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 9:23am

<<>>

It's far more complex than that.

The economy was such that both parents didn't have to work. Now people are in go-go-go mode just to pay the bills.

People weren't likely to move beyond their home town. Now it's common to move all over the country - even the globe - for job opportunities.

Multi-generational homes were common. Now they are looked down upon.

Going to church EVERY Sunday was expected. Now going to a ballgame is more important.

Expectations of children were different. Used to be a pickup game of stick ball was great. Then neighborhood leagues were a step up. Now kids are expected to play in superleagues so they can get college rides.

The technologies that were supposed to make our lives easier have actually shackled us to being plugged in 24/7.

Humans have always been self-centered - it's part of the core nature of being human. We aren't any more self-focused/self-centered than our predecessors. It's just that our pace and goals have changed.


iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2007
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 1:47pm

>>The economy was such that both parents didn't have to work. Now people are in go-go-go mode just to pay the bills.

Afraid that's not true. People today are many many times better off than they were in the 50s or 60s. If they have more bills to pay today, it's simply because their spending habits and expectations have outpaced their ability to afford. Look at the Heritage Foundation's poverty report for a definition of "poverty" in today's world. It's bewildering.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

>>People weren't likely to move beyond their home town. Now it's common to move all over the country - even the globe - for job opportunities.

True. Another evidence of improved economic activity and higher overall wealth. People need to be where they are needed and out of where they are not.

>> Multi-generational homes were common. Now they are looked down upon.

Proves my original point.

>> Going to church EVERY Sunday was expected. Now going to a ballgame is more important.

And some more.

>>The technologies that were supposed to make our lives easier have actually shackled us to being plugged in 24/7.

Not sure how that relates to being self centered and self focused.

>>Humans have always been self-centered - it's part of the core nature of being human. We aren't any more self-focused/self-centered than our predecessors. It's just that our pace and goals have changed.

Our pace and goals have changed to focus more of our attention on *ourselves*.




Edited 9/5/2007 1:54 pm ET by capegirardeau
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2005
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 2:57pm

Wait - you want me to take anything from the Heritage Foundation seriously? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA OK, wait, let me catch my breath....ROFLOL

<<>>

No, it's evidence of a shift in the ability to get around globally much more easily. It's evidence of a shift in the expectation that one is born, raised and dies in the same town. It's evidence that people are willing to reach out beyond their comfort level.

<<<>> Multi-generational homes were common. Now they are looked down upon.

Proves my original point.>>>

Ummmm....no, it merely demonstrates that the shift in society is more complex than your claim of "me me me". Seriously - would you date a grown woman who still lived at home, and not judge her for living with her parents? We see it all the time here on the boards - He/She still lives at home, what a loser. That attitude isn't about selfishness - it's about the modern expectation that mature children fly from the roost and become self-supporting.

<<<>> Going to church EVERY Sunday was expected. Now going to a ballgame is more important.

And some more. >>>

Not really, but maybe partially. A loss of interest in organized religion is a sign of independence, free thinking and intellectualism. Most Americans consider themselves "spiritual" but not religious. So going to a brick and mortar building to pray is no longer the expectation, but it doesn't mean people aren't celebrating their beliefs in other ways.

<<<>>The technologies that were supposed to make our lives easier have actually shackled us to being plugged in 24/7.

Not sure how that relates to being self centered and self focused.
>>> >>>

My point exactly...that there are more reasons for societal shifts than your simplistic "people are more selfish".

<<>>

Then exactly how do you explain that volunteerism and donations are on the rise? That reactive assistance to crises like Katrina and the Tsunami increase?


iVillage Member
Registered: 07-13-2007
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 3:48pm

<<<>>The technologies that were supposed to make our lives easier have actually shackled us to being plugged in 24/7.

*****************8

I don't think people change all that much. I think we see more of each other with the new technologies. We like to "watch" car wrecks, not someone carrying grocerioces home for there edelderly neighbor. (-: It creates perception when you only see the bad stuff. What I think "changed" is we ""see"" more of each other than ever before. If someone falls hard enough on one side of the world, we will be watching it in TV 5 minuets later on this side. Society is "adjusting". (-: It will affect friendships, religion, business, even how we fight wars and why. In the past 80 years, a single life time, we have gone from the most basic automobile to the edge of space flight for Disneyland. (-: China was another planet. Now I can be talking to a student practicing English in the next 5 minutes, or vist them in a few hours. The world is "smaller". And things are changing faster yet . . . people and society just have not adjusted to it all yet. People are people in the end. We aren't changing, our toys are.

I still open a door for my date. (-:

We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-2007
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 3:51pm
Am I sensing some defensiveness in your reply ? I don't know if that abusive comment was directed towards my post but I don't think that it has anything to do with yours. In my response to you I replied that there is an up side and a down side to every era. I, too, feel like I should have been born in a different time period. I agree that men today are not what they once were. But women also lacked plenty of freedom in those times and were somewhat looked down upon...The respect men gave them was the only thing they received. So I don't know how quick I'd be willing to jump back 50 years. And when did I ever say that passion is only found in short term romantic flings ? I agree with you, real passion is found in lasting relationships that actually grow rather then disentegrate. And no, abusive relationships are not passionate at all...they're melancholy and damaging. Any woman who thinks otherwise is an idiot. I am a VERY self FOCUSED person. I wouldn't call myself self centered because I'm always there for my friends and love my family more then life itself. But I have goals that I want to accomplish and I want to make a good life for myself without having to depend on someone else. Just because I'm driven doesn't mean I don't understand the value of family. Maybe I phrased myself wrong. They didn't lack passion back then, but they lacked a lot of freedom to be themselves and express themselves the way they wanted to.