- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The Way We Never Were, by Stephanie Coontz I read this book several years ago and found it fascinating. Below are several items I learned from the book.
The age of marriage today is no higher than it was in 1870.
The proportion of never married adults is lower today than it was in 1900
The rate of childlessness is lower today than in 1900
Because of early death, many families in 1900 had only one parent. The number
of children in single parent homes is about the same today as in 1900, and more
kids lived with neither parent in 1900 than today.
In 1750 to 1770, one third of all children born in Concord Massachusetts
(a bastion of Puritan tradition), were born out of wedlock.
During the 1780s and 1790s, one third of all brides in rural New England
were pregnant at marriage.
A study of illegitimacy in North Carolina found that out-of-wedlock
birth rates for white women were approximately the same in 1850 as
in 1970.
In nineteenth-century America, the “age of consent” for girls was
in many states as low as nine or ten.
Low teenage birth rates in the past can be correlated to the late onset
of puberty (they were having sex, they just couldn’t get pregnant)
In 1870, only 13 percent of European girls age 17.5 were fertile,
compared to 94 percent of American girls at the same age.
It is estimated that there was one abortion for ever 5 live births in 1850,
and as high as one in ever three in 1870.
Prostitution is far less widespread today than it was in the nineteenth century,
when New York City contained one prostitute for every 64 men, and the
Mayor of Savannah estimated his city to have one for ever 39 men.
Wow, all of that is really fascinating. I love learning about family dynamics across time or location. This idea of the “good old days” really is a myth isn’t! I had to read this book for a class I was taking several years ago. She does make a valid point in that history is often glossed over and romanticized (maybe she should take a look at LDS history!). I do, however, have some issues with some of her data which is suspect at least. Again, she makes a good point, but some of the data she uses simply isn’t there or doesn’t really support what she says. On edit, I thought a bit more about this after I first posted the above paragraph. I should point out that the class I was taking was in part about using data to determine policy – hence we examined the data pretty closely.
Its easy to remember the good old days when you have running water, electricity, and antibiotics. Another interesting book about progress of mankind is “The Rational Optimist”
DarkJedi wrote:I had to read this book for a class I was taking several years ago. She does make a valid point in that history is often glossed over and romanticized (maybe she should take a look at LDS history!). I do, however, have some issues with some of her data which is suspect at least. Again, she makes a good point, but some of the data she uses simply isn’t there or doesn’t really support what she says.
On edit, I thought a bit more about this after I first posted the above paragraph. I should point out that the class I was taking was in part about using data to determine policy – hence we examined the data pretty closely.
Yeah, that had me thinking when I read the data points. She seems to be trying to refute that the world is worse off now then it was in the past. I’m convinced but I was already a fan of the present.
It is also said that Rome fell because of its increasing levels of wickedness and debauchery. I’ve heard said this explicitely from a GA. Turns out that by our standards Rome was always wicked and debauched – they didn’t have our concept of morality but still managed to build the worlds greatest empire.
As a history teacher by training, I am convinced that the world has been the world and that evil has been evil pretty much throughout history. The only difference has been the attitudes of certain people at certain times in certain places that transcended history and created something unique – on both ends of the spectrum. What I take from this is that it’s not about how things used to be; it’s about how things can be, IF we make them be different than they naturally will be. In that sense, it’s not about God reaching out to us; it’s about us (gods) reaching out to each other (gods). I think that’s the heart of the Gospel, as well.
Quote:I read this book several years ago and found it fascinating. Below are several items I learned from the book.
These are all American figures. The situation is certainly a lot different here.
Quote:The age of marriage today is no higher than it was in 1870.
Average age or legal age?!
Quote:President Gordon B. Hinckley, stated: “All of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah haunt our society. Our young people have never faced a greater challenge. We have never seen more clearly the lecherous face of evil.”
Sheldon, you should also read Matt Ridley’s The Rational Optimist. He debunks the nostalgia myths from an economic and technological angle. Really fascinating stuff! “We have never seen more clearly the lecherous face of evil.” I agree with that. I don’t think evil is more prevalent now, but I certainly believe, with our modern technology and ability to know what happens all over the world, that we can see evil more clearly now than ever before.
I think we believe there is more simply because we are aware of and can see more. It’s not a function of more evil; it’s a function of better technology.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.