You must log in or register to comment.
Progress, indeed.
- her chair is more comfortable
- her clothing is less restrictive, owing to reduced standards of obedience to authority imposed on women
- what she’s reading is her own choice
- notice how the bible woman has to sit? That’s because she’s shorter. Improved nutritional standards mean the 1915 woman is better-fed, and as a result, is taller
Also the cigarette increase her lung… nevermind.
Imma pretend it’s a blunt to make her seem cooler 😎
If she smokes, she pokes. Another freedom the other lady doesn’t have.
I just noticed something about that chair. That style was a sort of precursor to the Lazy-Boy recliner - the back could be tilted backwards and forwards, held in place by a metal bar that rested on those notches on the back part of the arm rests. Not as convenient as a modern recliner since you actually had to get up off your ass to change the back angle, but still pretty comfortable.
The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
They [Young People] have exalted notions, because they have not been humbled by life or learned its necessary limitations; moreover, their hopeful disposition makes them think themselves equal to great things – and that means having exalted notions. They would always rather do noble deeds than useful ones: Their lives are regulated more by moral feeling than by reasoning – all their mistakes are in the direction of doing things excessively and vehemently. They overdo everything – they love too much, hate too much, and the same with everything else.
— Aristotle (~340 BC)
POV: bad parenting, “gobble up dainties” who put them there to begin with?
…cross their legs…
Is that a metaphor?
No. At the time, sitting attentively with your feet together was good manners. Crossing your legs would have been considered lax or sloven.
According to a quick, entirely un-fact-checked google, women in 1600s england had a 10% literacy rate. At least the bible would’ve been in english at this point?
Yeah, the famous King James Version of the bible was published in 1611.
For people from the early 1300s the left picture would be on the right.
That’s how I realized I was getting old, when I saw my peers saying the same things about the kids today that our elders said about us.
I’m in my 50s and this is why I keep trying to appreciate contemporary rap. I still fucking hate it, but at least I recognize that the voice in my head that says “this isn’t even music” said the exact same thing about rock and roll in the 1950s.
I think “music” is whatever you were exposed to in your teens. If it was trashbins banged together, that’ll be your music.
Hey, blueman group is cool
Idk man I’ve always been a bit against social media, but holy fuck people these days are so chronically online that it’s just no way it isn’t melting their dopamine receptors, especially ipad kids whose parent constantly give them a device to play mindless sensory videos every moment they’re awake.
Yes, most women could read in 1615.
Oh nice, just like Mike Johnson, who gave a talk extolling how 18th century values are necessary or everything goes to shit.
I actually agree that 18th century values are still applicable today, such as how Mike Johnson should be tarred and feathered.
Ah yes, the classic 18th century virtue of revolting against the ruling theocratic monarchy, which was only conceived because the Pope wouldn’t let Henry VIII divorce his first of six wives.
The only real Christians are the ones who follow the tradition of disregarding what the bible says, but only specifically as it relates to what this one king wanted in his lifetime
like i bet OOP wasn’t even alive in 1615
