Where Some cultural norms of yesteryear More conducive to long term relationships (da

[cyphorX]

I’m wondering if Some cultural norms of yesteryear were a bit More conducive to long term relationships. The idea that you’re supposed to find someone and pursue them. Years ago men used to court a woman, You would ask a woman’s parents or father for dating or marriage privileges. Also people dated and married pretty close to their own socioeconomic group, meaning a woman could only marry up one maybe two steps up the social ladder, and because of that most men only had to compete with other guys who were pretty much on the same playing field as them. and from the womans point of view, no matter who she chose within her available options her life was going to pretty much be the same, so things like how nice the guy was, or similar interests mattered a lot more. also picking the type of man who is less likely to someday, "leave for a pack of smokes and never come back" was a must.

every woman had atleast one sad lonely spinster aunt who got swept off her feet by a charming romeo 20 years prior, only to get abandoned after he deflowered her. So basically the man that would be put in the friendzone today would have been the first choice for a husband then. simply because he would be the safer choice, and back then women had too much at stake to risk on romeo. They did not have the safety net of section 8 housing, food stamps and court ordered child support. They had to pick the guy who would be there through thick and thin(the type of guy who today stays in the friendzone for years).

 

Flash forward to today, with reliable birth control, the breaking down of social stigmas, That smokin hot redhead from the trailer park can attract and marry a doctor or lawyer, So basically an average guy is forced to compete with the top 20% of men for the women that were once in their dating pool.

[d0nnivain]

None of that made for a happier relationship & in fact trapped certain people in unhealthy situations because they had no other options.

[Guyouthere]

You actually said it quite well and very accurate.

 

There were always unhappy relationships, but as a whole, it was a lot better back then.

 

And if ANYONE wants to differ…..

 

Let them see the reality of how many older marriages have lasted and are happy. compared to what is out there today.

 

Then you have some who will argue that "they stayed and were unhappy because it was unacceptable to leave".

 

Well, todays' society DOES ,make to TOO acceptable to just get up and leave.

 

Back then, people also tended to have more respect for God as well, and that also makes a BIG difference.

 

A better guy out there nowadays really has his work cut out as there aren't too many good women left anymore.

 

We have already lost a majority of todays' young people to the filth promoted in society (just look at so many of the colleges out there and their partying atmosphere).

 

The topic has many aspects to it.

 

Overall so many women today are a lesser quality as well, so many just out for sex and the money and false ideas of "I don't need a man in my life".

 

No woman who thinks that will ever be capable of raising a solid family.

[BluEyeL]

None of that made for a happier relationship & in fact trapped certain people in unhealthy situations because they had no other options.

That's ok with the OP he wishes he could just trap someone who didn't have other options.

[MoreAmore]

That's ok with the OP he wishes he could just trap someone who didn't have other options.

 

And here is my problem with the original argument. That's what it reads like.

 

 

Would you want to be with someone who is only with you for that, not because they love who you actually are? I would not.

[SmartDude]

The cultural norms of the past should stay in the past.

 

This is because those behaviors are now considered primitive and illogical. Though there are adjustments to be made, things are much better now.

 

Many of the problems we have today are caused by these rigid conservative views of relationships and family. It tends to produce people who have no ambition in life other than to consume resources and raise a family of their own. With an increase in living conditions comes a decrease in the mortality rate, people live longer than they used to. Now we have a global crisis which is being caused by over population of the planet.

 

If more people were "family oriented" these days, it could actually lead to our extinction.

[Guyouthere]

The cultural norms of the past should stay in the past.

 

This is because those behaviors are now considered primitive and illogical. Though there are adjustments to be made, things are much better now.

 

Many of the problems we have today are caused by these rigid conservative views of relationships and family. It tends to produce people who have no ambition in life other than to consume resources and raise a family of their own. With an increase in living conditions comes a decrease in the mortality rate, people live longer than they used to. Now we have a global crisis which is being caused by over population of the planet.

 

If more people were "family oriented" these days, it could actually lead to our extinction.

 

The basic family unit has eroded in todays' culture. That will eventually destroy the species as we know it.

 

Even now, we are seeing the results of it….

[Ami1uwant]

And here is my problem with the original argument. That's what it reads like.

 

 

Would you want to be with someone who is only with you for that, not because they love who you actually are? I would not.

 

 

Such an argument could be said now....

 

A man and woman go out on a date snd everything is fine for a first date but nothing happens further because the met online where there are multiple other choices. Had they met in a non online way they likely would have had a relationship.

[losangelena]

every woman had atleast one sad lonely spinster aunt who got swept off her feet by a charming romeo 20 years prior, only to get abandoned after he deflowered her. So basically the man that would be put in the friendzone today would have been the first choice for a husband then. simply because he would be the safer choice, and back then women had too much at stake to risk on romeo. They did not have the safety net of section 8 housing, food stamps and court ordered child support. They had to pick the guy who would be there through thick and thin(the type of guy who today stays in the friendzone for years).

 

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

 

Your argument is making my head spin. You're blaming "modern social ills" like birth control and Section 8 for being put in the friend zone?

 

How dare women have a fall-back, AMIRITE?

 

Let me guess, waiting for marriage to have sex is probably not on your list of, "some of those cultural norms from yesteryear" that we should reappropriate.

[BluEyeL]

People who feel bad about themselves and would like to have unearned power over others and wish the others would not have freedom are simply not nice. Much meaner than the players. Creepy too.

[lollipopspot]

So basically the man that would be put in the friendzone today would have been the first choice for a husband then.

 

No. Socially awkward people - men and women - have always had a hard time of it.

 

Back then, people also tended to have more respect for God as well, and that also makes a BIG difference.

 

You might prefer to join a church then and find someone who shares your values, or maybe move to the south - there are places where pretty much everyone professes religious devotion and you would be the odd one out if you didn't.

 

I for one find organized religion/superstition illogical and intolerable in terms of dictating social mores.

[Gaeta]

How far in time you guys want to go back? Let me guess......

 

Back when women didn't have the right to vote, own property, own a bank account, sign checks, and even less get a divorce? I see.....

[Mr1oyalty]

I would say the families power of electing suitors may have been one of the better norms for both men and women. You mostly focused on women so I will say how it seems to affect men. Usually left to himself many guys will not choose a quality woman first but the hottest one he can land. Then when the hottest chick fails him outside of looks he becomes jaded altogether and all the women in his mind are like the hot one that failed him. If we are talking about the "bad boy" or player he may have sex with a lot of random women and eventually he will just reaffirm his own false ideas of how all women are, ie just like him. Either way with no guidance or barrier between young hormones and the opposite sex it seems there is a easy road to destruction.

 

Then you have the fact that today the "bad boy" or player is respected, and I am not talking about by women! As they are easy to point the finger at if you so choose. There was a time when a man lost respect among his peers for sleeping with lots of women or cheating and this is not so today. Hell, I am totally admired for when I cheated on my wife by lots of guys at my old place of work because the woman was so "hot", and encouraged that I could and should "smash" many women on a certain floor of a business lol. Mind you women do like a man who is well respected among his peers(other men). So men are just as guilty with the issue for making men with such behaviors more attractive to women. The cultural norms in certain times did not allow a player any prestige because MEN did not respect such behavior. This is why the family element with suitors was probably a conducive element to successful relationships long term. When a father has say so in the quality of man who approaches his daughter, or a woman the kind of girl her son chooses, that wisdom often is better the a hormone filled young person self willed drive. It also cause men to conform to the fathers view of manhood which won't be sleeping with every thing that walks. Of course you have abusive parents in which the situation can still be terrible but overall I think the family aspect and involvement was a positive.

 

As far as women choosing idiots well, I don't know too many women who fall for badboys that had a really good father figure. My sisters both chose good guys that I would approve of and that is likely do to my fathers role and influence. So the problem is multifaceted, for the every low quality woman there is often a low quality father. Its an extreme example, but how many strippers you hear of with quality fathers? I hate to say it but most issues start at the head or with the natural leaders, so I would not throw to much blame towards woman in general. That said it seems we have created a mutually destructive environment as far as long term relationships go.

[Guyouthere]

No. Socially awkward people - men and women - have always had a hard time of it.

 

 

 

You might prefer to join a church then and find someone who shares your values, or maybe move to the south - there are places where pretty much everyone professes religious devotion and you would be the odd one out if you didn't.

 

I for one find organized religion/superstition illogical and intolerable in terms of dictating social mores.

 

The problem is that society has become complacent to God and His laws and morals set forth by Him.

 

All of todays disintegration of society can be linked back to that.

[cyphorX]

That's ok with the OP he wishes he could just trap someone who didn't have other options.

Not trap, I would still have to compete, I would just be competing within MY socioeconomic group. in other words compete agains guys with the same resources and opportunity as myself.

[scorpiogirl]

Wow you guys should start a club where you can get together and lament the fallen women you are stuck with today.

 

If you don't mind, I'd rather be single than be with someone who wants to trap me in a relationship that fulfills their every fantasy and would probably be my worst nightmare.

 

You actually want relationships where people have no choice but to stay??

 

I can't even deal with this.

[Buddhist]

I’m wondering if Some cultural norms of yesteryear were a bit More conducive to long term relationships.

 

So basically an average guy is forced to compete with the top 20% of men for the women that were once in their dating pool.

 

Well they're the cultural norms of yesteryear, so they aren't coming back anytime soon, might as well give up on the wishful thinking. And your logic there has a giant gaping hole. While she might be able to apply for the job with the top 20%, she's also competing with all the other potentials in that arena. I don't see the top 20% of men with harems, so actually there's still plenty of people to go around.

 

I can't help but see posts like this as sour men abdicating responsibility for their own outcomes and playing victim. It's all women's fault I'm single because they can choose not to date me. Bring back the good old days of her not having a choice.

[cyphorX]

Well they're the cultural norms of yesteryear, so they aren't coming back anytime soon, might as well give up on the wishful thinking. And your logic there has a giant gaping hole. While she might be able to apply for the job with the top 20%, she's also competing with all the other potentials in that arena. I don't see the top 20% of men with harems, so actually there's still plenty of people to go around.

 

I can't help but see posts like this as sour men abdicating responsibility for their own outcomes and playing victim. It's all women's fault I'm single because they can choose not to date me. Bring back the good old days of her not having a choice.

 

Actually the top 20% do kinda have harems, it's called serial dating. on daytime TV at least a few times a year you will see a panel of women complaining that men these days don't want to commit, I want to laugh and cry at the same time when I hear this.

I know so many guys who are lonely and would jump at the chance to be in a committed relationship. and not all of these guys are in the neckbeard brigade either.

 

But I also know a few guys who have no trouble meeting women, they have nice homes, nice cars are descent looking etc etc and they DON'T want to settle down, and for them it makes sense, they know they are what 90% of women are looking for so they just have fun putting notches in their bedpost. a friend I went to highschool with won the texas lotto 6 years ago, he used the money to open his own business and buy a house cash, he was alone for years, barely got dates when he started his business women came out of the woodwork it pissed him off, so he now has a pump em and dump em attitude. And although I don't agree with his behavior, I can sympathies with why he is doing what he is doing. Because in his mind it's "where were these women when i was broke? I'm still the same person"

[Shining One]

I'm of the opposite mindset. I wish things would move forward faster to a point where the responsibilities of dating are completely even by default.

[chumble]

People weren't as fat.

[Els]

They were. One of them was insisting that kids be taught how to spell properly.

 

Anyway. You do realize that back in the "good ol' days" most men had to singlehandedly provided for their family, right? Oh, and no sex til you marry, too. And, like you said, no birth control. Enjoy the ten kids!

[thecrucible]

I think today we have more choices to shape our own lives and that this can cause some anxiety, something that the book The Paradox of Choice touches upon. I also genuinely think there is more pressure on young people to achieve the best and be successful. When you don't reach that benchmark, things get depressing. There are lot of people with good lives who aren't satisfied and always want something better. I think perhaps in the past, people would be more fatalist and accept the way things are, not constantly strive for more. It's hard on both genders too. We are all expected to have it all. I feel this pressure constantly as a young woman.

[thecrucible]

Anyway. You do realize that back in the "good ol' days" most men had to singlehandedly provided for their family, right? Oh, and no sex til you marry, too. And, like you said, no birth control. Enjoy the ten kids!

 

Or even worse..With some of my ancestors, it was the whole family working down coal mines. During the winter, they would barely see daylight spending all day labouring from the crack of dawn till dusk. As they were poor, they had to choice but to get the whole family involved in the work.

 

Also they did have birth control, in the sense that they could space out having sex and this would obviously ensure they would get pregnant less frequently. Then they had more kids because they knew some would die. Also many of my ancestors got pregnant before marrying and this is more common than people think. But then it also means lots of shotgun marriages in my family. I am glad I don't have that pressure and can marry for love more than anything else.

[Els]

Or even worse..With some of my ancestors, it was the whole family working down coal mines. During the winter, they would barely see daylight spending all day labouring from the crack of dawn till dusk. As they were poor, they had to choice but to get the whole family involved in the work.

 

Interesting. Both of my grandmothers (and grandaunts etc) were poor as well, but the burden of providing still fell to their husband, who typically did manual labour for 12+ hours a day and 6 or 7 days a week. The women did work very hard as well, but at housework, for they grew their own food and had no running water or modern appliances, hence carrying water from the village tap, washing clothes by hand, etc. One of their husbands died prematurely, and the oldest son had to quit school and step up to take over the role of provider even though he was barely a boy.

 

Which also reminds me, I think those people banging on about the 'good ol' days' should spend a few months living in rural Asia. Not the rural communities in developed countries that mostly have running water and electricity etc, but villages that are literally living like they are in the 1800s. We'll see if they can stand more than a day or two before they run home to modern comforts...