T
TheAmazingGrace
Guest
What are you trying to prove?
P
Pup7
Guest
It is more available now. But it was as rampant then.
You also have to keep in mind that what was considered porn has changed with history. I mean, in the 1880s, pictures of women in pantalettes were scandalous…but believe me, there was even more graphic stuff out there.
G
gracepoole
Guest
Pup, I say this kindly – take a breath. The amount of antagonism reflected in your comments doesn’t need to be present for your claims to be considered mindfully. The noise of anger makes it hard to really hear you.
As to your claim that “families were scattering thanks to the war by that time,” that isn’t the experience of my community at all. Men left, served, came back or didn’t come back, and the community continued. Are we just some kind of weird aberration? What about my family in the northern regions of Italy? Same happened there.
As to your claim that “families were scattering thanks to the war by that time,” that isn’t the experience of my community at all. Men left, served, came back or didn’t come back, and the community continued. Are we just some kind of weird aberration? What about my family in the northern regions of Italy? Same happened there.
P
Pup7
Guest
I’m not angry in the least. Holy smokes. I say this kindly - you’re seriously misreading me here.
And in reality, they’re not claims.
Last edited:
S
SnowRose
Guest
I’ve stopped even considering arguing w this guy.
Lets see … 1918 borderline female voting (worldwide)
No general healthcare
No retirement insurance
Compulsory membership in the local Lutheran church on baptism (unless your parents filed to opt you out)
Full male military conscription
Penicillin not invented
Accountancy practices caused by the Great Depression not invnted
JimCrow laws in the US
…
I can go on but you get my point. Worldwide 1918 was not a good year. There were (merited) rebellions/revolutions against oppression in a number of countries. There was the Flu that caused worldwide life span to drop.
I’m not even starting in on the situation in South Africa, Indochina, China and so on.
To think 1918 to be better than 2018, even spiritually, is speaking from such a vantage point of privilege I don’t see the point of arguing.
Lets see … 1918 borderline female voting (worldwide)
No general healthcare
No retirement insurance
Compulsory membership in the local Lutheran church on baptism (unless your parents filed to opt you out)
Full male military conscription
Penicillin not invented
Accountancy practices caused by the Great Depression not invnted
JimCrow laws in the US
…
I can go on but you get my point. Worldwide 1918 was not a good year. There were (merited) rebellions/revolutions against oppression in a number of countries. There was the Flu that caused worldwide life span to drop.
I’m not even starting in on the situation in South Africa, Indochina, China and so on.
To think 1918 to be better than 2018, even spiritually, is speaking from such a vantage point of privilege I don’t see the point of arguing.
A
alice24
Guest
Interestingly, one result of my work for middle europe, mainly austria, germany, france but also england, was that the defintion didn´t change that much. Often people think it would have been labeled as porn to see a woman in underwear in 1900. But the discussion about what is porn, what is “the artistic nude” and what is banned, but not pornographic erotic material was very vivid among lawyers and other people. The result was often that pornography was only the visible act itself with errected organs and clearly displayed sexual practices (sorry for being graphic here).
When I say there was a lot of pornography back then, I meant exactly this, not “less disturbing erotics”
Last edited:
G
gracepoole
Guest
Miners, factory workers in major cities like NYC and Chicago, workers of the AFL – all had 8-hour work days before the turn of the century.
And no – the Progressive Party platform in 1912 called for a universal 8-hour work day.
And no – the Progressive Party platform in 1912 called for a universal 8-hour work day.
G
goout
Guest
I’m trying to answer the thread question with well established statistics and historical facts.goout:
What are you trying to prove?
Ummmm, what do you expect?
(to which you will respond with anecdotes about how good this is and how bad that is…)
T
TheAmazingGrace
Guest
You haven’t provided any statistics whatsoever since we started talking.
Last edited:
A
alice24
Guest
Again, where are your sources?
P
Pup7
Guest
None of that is “most of the working class”. As I said, it was passed for a select few.
No one is disputing TR’s Progressive push. (He’s one of my favorite historical figures, actually.) Just because TR pushed for it for everyone doesn’t mean everyone had it. Because they didn’t. And it was actually Grant who first signed an initiative for an 8 hour work day, but it was not codified into Federal law across the board for all workers in all locations until the passing of the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1938.
Major cities pushed for union involvement and organized labor. That wasn’t the case in other places. Major cities also had the example of Henry Ford - other areas didn’t and didn’t care.
“Major cities” did not apply to most of America in 1918 (still doesn’t, actually).
G
gracepoole
Guest
Hoo boy. I’d hate to run into you when you’re truly angry. Phrases like “Seriously?” and “Go read history” and “Do you realize I’m not an idiot” read to others like anger whether you mean them to or not.
P
Pup7
Guest
“Do you realize I’m not an idiot” was a very specific response to a very specific and pointed condescending comment, made after numerous pointed and condescending comments in my direction. It got old after a while. Yep. I was annoyed.
“Seriously” is a legitimate statement of incredulousness. Not anger.
“Go read history” is just a direct statement.
I really don’t feel you have any right to comment on what you believe my demeanor may be. And yes, now I am annoyed.
“Seriously” is a legitimate statement of incredulousness. Not anger.
“Go read history” is just a direct statement.
I really don’t feel you have any right to comment on what you believe my demeanor may be. And yes, now I am annoyed.
Last edited:
A
alice24
Guest
This is mainly for central europe, but refers stats of the US and gives literature advice. Don´t read it when you want to believe it was morally better back then in 1918. Or if you won´t read sth. about child prostitution or eugenics. But for those constantly claiming there was no porn like today back then, it is a very well researched publication of a very good historian. I used his work a lot.
P
Pup7
Guest
I have seen somewhat (emphasis heavy on the “somewhat”) comparable porn to now from back then (and it seems…worse somehow, maybe because deep down we all want to believe it didn’t exist like that then - chuckling because no, I didn’t seek it out LOL - it was in a human sexuality class in college a zillion years ago). I’ve just always been under the impression that the definition was a bit broader or may have stood as a bit broader back then. I guess “soft porn” is what it is regardless of the era.
And I’ve never seen so-called “peep show” reels from back then, but I have read they were…surprising.
In a weird way that book looks interesting.
A
alice24
Guest
I have to say I was a little surprised, too - it was a work not that long ago and I´ve seen much weird stuff from diverse centuries before. I didn´t knew about the child sex traffic scandals for example, It came up after reading many magazines with satiric content from the 1910´s.The work itself was basic research, so not much is publicated until now and the porns itself are still traded as erotica, not historical sources. One can now think that I must be a really weird person to do this out of my free will (I could have picked a different work) but 1) I like researching on new fields and 2) it was about the connection between the uprising “modern” medicine, the social democracy and sexual ethics and for this reason highly interesting for me (I like social history very much).
Last edited:
D
DonnaNoble
Guest
I wonder, if in 2118 people will be asking, were we happier in 2018 or now? Just think, to some future folks, we are already living in the good old days/simpler times.
As for happiness, I think in a lot of ways it’s a choice. It doesn’t matter when or where one lives, you can always find plenty of “bad things” to make you sad and/or plenty of “good things” to make you happy. It’s what you choice to focus on that determines the outcome.
As for happiness, I think in a lot of ways it’s a choice. It doesn’t matter when or where one lives, you can always find plenty of “bad things” to make you sad and/or plenty of “good things” to make you happy. It’s what you choice to focus on that determines the outcome.
Last edited:
D
DarkLight
Guest
One major complaint is that we’re taking rape a lot more seriously now and moving away from victim-blaming attitudes. Much of the prominence we see with rape now is that we’re creating an environment where it’s much safer for her to report a rape. This went double in the u.s. for non-white women; a lot of the stereotypes about black or asian women made it much easier for them to be taken advantage of (for example, stereotyping black women as sexually aggressive made it much easier for a man to claim that she came on to him). But in general, there was a lot of stereotyping that a woman must have done something to invite being assaulted, which led to women being much more likely to stay quiet to avoid reputation damage.
M
MonteRCMS
Guest
There was porn that survived the volcanic ash at Pompei and that was carved within the Egyptian stone pyramids.
I don’t think we had “blue movies” or pulp printing back then.
I don’t think we had “blue movies” or pulp printing back then.
P
Pup7
Guest
Oh man some of that stuff…WOW.