Nope.... can't be...yer livin in Disneyland. Your kids, my kids, our friends kids.... all are a bunch of foul mouthed ruffians. Reform school canidates one and all.
What do we think now?
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
Nope.... can't be...yer livin in Disneyland. Your kids, my kids, our friends kids.... all are a bunch of foul mouthed ruffians. Reform school canidates one and all.
I think possibly everyone perceives slightly different situations at different places and times and I don't question others perceptions and don't expect others to question mine. In 2010 I've witnessed the whole gamut ranging from young people being polite and helpful to others being disrespectful, rude, crude, lewd and practically nude. So we can't go tarring everyone with the same brush. The only difference I see is in 1959 there were consequences for the behaviour of those I just described, today there seems to be a lot less. :smile::smile:
Quiet so, in those days, women (or blacks) had no choice as to what they could do. Most women became housewives, that was expected of them. If some woman wanted to work outside home, just about the only jobs open for them were secretary, nurse, or prostitute (or of course, a nun).
Women who wanted to pursue professional career were regarded as freaks, as amusing sideshows. And of course they faced numerous obstacles, discrimination being the biggest of them all.
It was the same with blacks, they were not in any better position that women. Gays of course would be imprisoned (or beaten up) for engaging in gay activities, gays were hidden deep in the closet.
Maybe in Communist Siberia- CERTAINLY NOT in any part of Canada I lived in.. :lol::lol::lol:
1965 – Everett George Klippert is arrested for private, consensual sex with men. After being assessed "incurably homosexual", he is sentenced to an indefinite "preventive detention" as a dangerous sexual offender. This was considered by many Canadians to be extremely homophobic, and prompted sympathetic articles in Maclean's and The Toronto Star, eventually leading to increased calls for legal reform in Canada which passed in 1969[citation needed].
So, I had a little chat with my mother the other day and mentioned this topic. She shrugged and said she wanted to do the home-maker thing. She likes gardening, visiting with neighbors and friends most days, reading, raising her babies. Working would interfere with all that.
But also, she basically said that she had the pussy so she made the rules. And my father is easy going, respects all the work my mother does, and has always treated my mother very well.
These days, a lot of couples have to have both parents working in order to keep the family surviving. And that's better?
yup, anna, that is the bottom line, society came along and took the ability away from any thought
of one parent working and the other being able to stay home, and that was also partly the fault
of each couple, as time went on the houses they wanted got bigger and bigger, two cars not one, and
so many other things that took so much of their money, to have those things two people had to work.
I was home all of those years, just like your mom, I loved it, and the plan was perfect, someone had
to supply the money, so he did, he would have made a horrible mom, the house would have been a mess,
and the kids would have gottin away with murder, 'such a softy', but he loved to work, and so did I,
and I worked hard at home, and when he got home he didn't have to start mowing the lawn, or anything,
unless it was carpentry, and we loved it, we were equal.
Neither one of us ever wanted our children staying at some day care, or with neighbours, and least of
all with relatives.
That is the way WE wanted it, not the way I had to do it because I was a poor housewife with shackles on,
far far from it.
That sounds about as good as it gets Talloola, much to the chagrin of some like Sir Joseph McCarthy. :lol::lol:
LOL...society is at fault, is it........ How about the placing the fault wholly where it belongs, on the individual couples.
By 60s the attitudes were beginning to change. UK legalized homosexuality in 1965; we were a bit behind them. I think hippy movement was largely responsible in loosening the attitudes towards sexual activities.
However, that was in the 60s. We are discussing the 50s here, pre hippy days. In the instance you gave, at least there was an outcry. In 50s there were cases of gays being imprisoned, with no public outcry.
Indeed, in UK, Oscar Wilde was tried (and found guilty of) homosexuality. Of course, that was in the previous century. But the attitudes did not really change until the 60s, and after the hippy and the free sex movement.
So, are there any modern day epiphanies that are equal to the old days' "Hey, women are humans, too"?
Yer not coming through too clear. Talloola said how good she had it and I agreed. :smile:
I would be guilty of what you say had I said "your kids", I did not say that nor did I mean your kids personally.That said, most parents would be pretty amazed at what the most innocent lookings kids on the street say and I'm not talking about teenagers. I'm talking about kids around 9 - 10 yrs. old. I'd like to think that my grandkids are all sweetness and innocence too but when they think no one is listening, they are not so sweet and innocent. As teenagers in my time of growing up, I can tell you with total honesty, I never swore in the sense of the words used by kids today. I thought I was really going for it when I said the word sh!t. I never used as much as the word damn in front of my Mom before I was 19 and married! My friends didn't either. Girls who used foul language were very frowned upon.
To me you are not questioning my perception. You are questioning the reality of my growing up years. You seem to be doing that to Talloola, JLM and me. Gerryh might be suggesting JLM has alzheimers but gerry isn't all that much younger than me and I doubt very much changed for his childhood years over mine. JLM and Talloola are a little older but again - not enough that things changed much. The world moves at a much faster pace now than it did then. People laugh at the old shows like "The Waltons" from years ago on TV. Most of us watched those shows because they actually did bring back a lot of memories. Naturally the show exaggerates how functional the family is but it really wasn't that far off real life for many of us. You can choose to dis-believe that all you want. It doesn't change how any of us who remember it feel about it or remember it. Remember, I have siblings to talk about those times with. The memories are not just mine. I have friends from as far back as grade one who also talk about the way it was.
Kids today can be really nice kids and they can be really bad. You say what's so different then and I say - because in my time of growing up, we didn't lip off adults when our folks were not around to hear or see us. The rules still applied. You can't say the majority of kids are no different than kids ever were. You weren't there with us.
Well, I think kids today are no different from kids back then.
Maybe the language they use is different, but that's no surprise - kids try to 'push the envelope', that's what being a teenager is all about. The job of a teenager is to push against the limits, that's a way of testing adulthood. If the limits of adulthood have changed, that's not the fault of the teenagers.
Parental authority is eroded today, and that is perfectly understandable. Respect for all kinds of authority has eroded. In the 50s, people used to respect and think highly of centres of power, such as government, courts, press, church etc. People in authority were in general respected.
These days, people don’t respect those in authority and a good thing too. But when parents don’t respect authority figures, do they really expect kids to respect the parents? Kids are not dummies, they learn from their parents. They see parents don’t respect anybody, neither do they.
These days parents must earn the respect of their kids, in old days, it was automatic. Parents got respect just because they were parents, they did not have to earn it. These days parenting is much more difficult, compared to old days. In the old days, if child misbehaved, all a parent had to do was get a switch (or a belt, a rod, whatever) and beat the kid senseless. Nobody questioned parent’s authority to do that. But again, these days there is no respect for any kind of authority.
So these days it is more difficult to get kids to respect you, and parents are partly responsible for that. Parents (rightly) don’t respect anybody, politicians, ministers, judges, press etc. Then they can’t expect children to respect them, they have to earn it.
So in a way, lack of respect for parents is a biproduct of a very desirable trait in the society, that is suspicion of all authority.