Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
January 11, 2013
Link

Statistics

Replies: 101

Dangerous Nostalgia

:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
I see people mentioning about how society was so much better X amount of years ago, and that's their ideal. However, through either ignorance or rose coloured glasses, they seem to forget the negatives of their 'ideal' period. But even 60 years ago, there are so many things that we now take for granted that weren't around for example:

-death tolls on roads were in quadruple digits whereas now, they are in double/triple digits, even though there is a larger population and more people drive.

-lead paint and asbestos was legal

-marital rape was legal.

-people thought that stealing children off of mothers was okay (IE, the stolen generation)




Now, my question is, are people who want life to be like it was 50 or more years ago actually okay with things like this? Or do they just take things for granted, and only have a romanticized view of that period of time?
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconsamuraishoujo95:
samuraishoujo95 Featured By Owner Jan 16, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Fact is, as human beings it is in our nature to never be fully satisfied with any situation.
It's kinda like being surrounded by people you don't like and you wanting a change. Then when you get the change you want and are surrounded by different people whom you still don't like you think "Oh the people before this were wayy better."

now here's my question: why name this thread "dangerous nostalgia"?
Reply
:iconemeowrald:
Emeowrald Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
I think that people who haven't lived during those time periods have a romanticized view because the only way they've seen these time periods is via television and movies from that era. 60 years ago movies and television made everything seem positive and innocent so things such the stolen generation and marital rape were just treated as nonexistent. I think this was probably due to censorship and something called the Hays Code when it came to television and radio at the time.
If you actually did live in that era I think weather or not you would want to return to such a time period may not be because of the time period in itself, but the idea of wanting to return to a simpler period of one's own life when one was younger and had a fresher perspective on things, and also because maybe some of the bad things you stated may not have been experienced by them. This maybe especially the case if one had a positive time back then. If one did not have a positive time than they would not want to return to such a time period.

In short if they associate the time period with a positive time in their lives than they would want to go back, if not than chances are they wouldn't.
Reply
:iconwolfyspice:
WolfySpice Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
Everything remains as it never was, I guess...
Reply
:iconbullet-magnet:
Bullet-Magnet Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
They way it has been consistently for centuries is this: things are always getting better, people are always saying it's getting worse.
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm thinking, a lot of them are white men, living wealthy secure lives, thinking that none of the badness will ever happen to them.
Also denial. It's no fun admitting that your father was abusive towards your mother, and that she was miserable all the time. No fun at all. (And to those less smart than MD: abuse is more than just marital rape. He'll, I think society in the fifties and earlier was abusive towards women.)
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Just look at some of the replies I've gotten to this thread :roll: Feminism is bad unless we are invading countries!!! :roll:
Reply
:icongeistjager:
Geistjager Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist
Yeah... The bad old days of openly tolerated totalitarianism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerence, infant mortality, nuclear weapons...

Oh wait...

I'll get my coat.
Reply
:iconsapphire-ashesx:
Sapphire-Ashesx Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
Nostalgia is the word I hate the most because of things like this.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I agree with this post on a general basis, nostalgia for another time is indeed often an illusion. The good old time were not that good.

Albeit, intriguingly to me, you are arguing things are not different over time, but different over geography. I think things were neither different over time or geography. And individuals are pretty much the same everywhere you go.

VE.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Yes, those things are different over time. Interraccial marriage is hardly illegal in America anymore, is it?
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Missed the point a little. I am linking this thread here to this thread [link] .

Your view of your country is to me no better than the nostalgia some have for the "good old times" you decry in this thread.

VE.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
It's ironic, because you're doing the exactly same thing as what I am supposed in doing. I don't think Australia is perfect :lmao: Australia is full of racist, drunk, uneducated fools. I feel that we have bitten into consumerism too much. We try to live in houses and with gardens that don't suit our environment. Don't get me started with the natural disasters.

But hey, I am supposedly over looking the bad things, and overly national... because I'm a liberal that prefers liberal countries, as supposed to conservative countries. huh. Isn't it funny. :slow:
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thinking your nation is better than America does not mean you think your nation is perfect.

I would not recommend this kind of unqualified statement. You think yourself better than others, that is arrogance. And these are _your_ words...

as for this,

because I'm a liberal that prefers liberal countries, as supposed to conservative countries.

it ties in nicely to my argument that liberals and conservatives are needed for society. And Australia has both, and a vital discussion between those... As for liberal or conservatives, I for one haven't forgotten the support to GWB's war that Australians gave. Hardly the liberals...rather, a function of the government in place at any given time, which changes with the population of Australia...

VE.
Reply
:iconamanda-graham:
Amanda-Graham Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Professional Writer
nostalgia is by its definition and experience 'romanticized'. i am the wrong person to ask about neglecting the negatives of the past ... most of the negatives are acceptable to me in any time period; just do NOT mess with my pudding!
Reply
:iconreasonablerobot:
ReasonableRobot Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
what about hippies, man? bring on the pot, the LSD, and shirtless chicks with armpit hair, bro!!!!! hells yeah!
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
Marital rape was legal? Thats an attitude missy, not a reality. There was never a law that said marital rape was legal. People were not so quick to go to the blackest end of human behavior just because there was no law against certain types of behavior. We didn't hop on down to the local school and pop off 20 kindergarteners just because there was no specific rules against it. People had a more spiritual outlook, and, so many people believed in treating their fellow humans as they themselves wished to be treated than today. You could actually work your entire life for one company and retire from it without being fired a year or two before you reached your retirement age and fulfilled the requirements for your pension.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Oh no, it was legal. As a married female, it was your 'duty' to have sex. A man forcing his wife could not be rape, because it was her 'duty.' Ever heard the term 'lay back and think of England.'? There is a law against going and shooting kindergartners. many laws in fact, depending on where it happens. Some common ones, depending on the situation:
- break and entering
- wielding a weapon in public
- wielding a weapon with intent to kill
- murder
- attempted murder
- grievous bodily harm

Your situation doesn't really compare. If the law said 'it is the duty of children to be killed.', that'd be a different situation entirely.



More spiritual? Could you please explain to me how interracial marriage being illegal is 'more spiritual'?
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
Also, I need to know if you mean to imply that having companies that kept their implicit promises about retirement to their employees was somehow tangent to England allowing marital rape or because of banning interracial marriage?

I don't see you and your fellow feminists banding together in some massive army and occupying India and it's neighboring countries to end honor killings or unpunished gang rape leading to death.

There really were some nice perks about quite of bit of the past, and, they were not all the result of some human failing or wrong doing.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
:iconheaddeskplz:


Feminism =/= Invading countries like imperialists because they are doing things that you dislike doing. Western nations have absolutely no right to go in and play Mr. global police man.

What makes your comment even more stupid is that the rape culture in India comes from the west. The victorians left their prudishness and their lack of woman's rights in India.

You know what I actually do, instead of wanting unethical invasions and wars, when wars and invasions are the reason for the for the problem?

I donate money to overseas woman shelters that both help and educate women, and that educate the public.

The idea you think it's okay to fight injustice via unjust means in hilarious.
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
An invasion of suffragettes was all I was thinking of in my suggesting. Those ladies occupied many places where they were in direct physical danger. You just want to look at my points in the most exaggerated manner possible.

The thing points to the fact that you aren't any better than anyone in the past that enjoyed the perks of the day, and, didn't really fight for all of the problems, just accepted them with the merest nod against them.

Your posture is holier than thou just in case you think you can find some other way to try to smear my ideas.
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
And you're making excuses, because you can't handle how truly ugly the world really was and often still is.

Sorry, kid, but we can't allow the thought that rape is ok in India, just because you don't like that is is a real thing.
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
Your reading comprehension seems to be non existent. I asked her why she was any better than the people that weren't actively opposing the rape law during that historical period. I asked her why she wasn't more directly opposing what is happening in India, and, she said she didn't think she could actively oppose the behavior in India. She sends money because it wouldn't be right for her to actively oppose any of India's internal policies, and, she blamed their behavior on the english. Not sure I buy that particular position. Certainly the English opposed the Sultan's rights to multiple wives once they held massive debt over their heads, but, if they did that same thing in India, I'm pretty sure that Dreary would have supported such decisions, if they didn't go against some other cause that she didn't think would have been effected by such support.
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Directly opposing? As in why she hasn't travelled to India and carried out an assassination?

This is real life, kiddo. Real life where sometimes there are limits to what the individual can do.
Real life where voting for your chosen representative in your country's political arena is it.

She also did explain why the English laid the foundation for what we see in India today.
The English only disapproved of the multiple wives thing, because of their religion at the time. It had nothing to do with their view on women.

You are so ignorant it hurts my brain.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
:lmao: Can you tell me how a technological group of beings that have just progressed beyond arguing about wether the earth was flat or not were going to meet various groups of much less developed groups of people without believing that they had met children that couldn't take care of themselves in a civilized manner?
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Look, dickhead, she proved you wrong.
Back then it WAS legal to rape your wife, just like it was legal to beat your wife up until recent times in the west and still is in many other countries.
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
Look asshole, that has nothing to do with other aspects of that era that may inspire nostalgia that isn't dangerous, and, in fact unless someone is specifically stating that they miss the thought of the time before that law where they could have raped their wife, and, that that is what they want a return to then any other nostalgia for that time is legitimate, non-threatening, and, completely without taint.

So shut the fuck up.
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
It does have to do with that, actually.

The values back then were conservative. Don't talk about ugly things, and pretend like the humble wife is the pinnacle of motherhood.
There were lots of happy boys then. Boys growing up, being taught that they were the centre of the world, and that their mothers were only too happy to be nothing more than wives and mothers.

These things are connected. The old school family, the things hidden and not talked about, the misogyny.

Connected? You bet it is connected!
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
It is not the basis for the prosperity of the time. Read my words before you attempt to put words into my mouth. If someone has a nostalgia for the amount of business and employment opportunities back then when the empire existed that doesn't mean that they are yearning for opportunities with a wife shackled by the system of the times.

You can yearn for simpler times without celebrating how they got there. You could try to recreate the good things about the times without wanting to recreate the bad.
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
You are limiting the conversation as we go along. Don't think I don't notice.
And yes, those that are nostalgic for those times tend to feel sad about all the women and colored folks taking their jobs.

Those times were not simpler. In fact, I have no fucking clue what you mean by 'simpler' in this context.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Ah, so instead of answering my question, you follow it with question. great move there.
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
When was this law written? When did the situation evolve from being hunter gatherers that had to behave in a certain fashion to a finished society that could afford to change their mode of life?

There are always trade offs when civilization develops new behaviors based on breakthroughs. Certain parts of necessary behavior are always going to come to a point where something new becomes possible. You really can't expect society to behavior as though hindsight developed after the fact somehow becomes the only choice our ancestors could have made.

Also, I haven't got a clue about England being the entirety of civilization, nor the absolute standard. Could you write a believable story covering human evolution that would show how it could go from one set of behaviors to a more advanced set of behaviors without any problems?

Today we still have people of all races teaching their children behavior that prevents a smooth change over from one mode of thinking to another. Also, we can't take their children away from them and educate them in the image of the perfect state run models required to maintain life without becoming the biggest totalitarian regime of all time.

Each of your questions posed in and of themselves presupposes a perfect state that should be obvious to everyone, but, that wasn't so obvious when the behavior originated. Also, you can't go from one mode of behavior to another without some retaliatory behavior against the perceived oppressors, and, every man that ever existed under these so called rape laws of yours did not necessarily use them in the manner in which you disclaim, and, in fact not at all in any event.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Also, I haven't got a clue about England being the entirety of civilization, nor the absolute standard. Could you write a believable story covering human evolution that would show how it could go from one set of behaviors to a more advanced set of behaviors without any problems?

What the hell are you talking about? I've mentioned problems from all over the western world.

Also, we can't take their children away from them and educate them in the image of the perfect state run models required to maintain life without becoming the biggest totalitarian regime of all time.

What? Are you really advocating for the stolen generation?


You're crazy. I never said 'all men raped their wives' nor did I say 'No man ever rapes his wife in the current time'.

I'm saying 'we need these laws because sometimes people rape their spouses.'
Reply
:icondruid69:
druid69 Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
You haven't mentioned the status of marriage rights of various current societies. You've just jumped all over the place trying to equate various problems that multiple times have had with people's consideration of those times as being preferable to these ones.

It doesn't matter what the problems of those times were compared with the benefits that people see with those times. The bad things don't retroactively make the good ones non existent, and, if the bad times (in other words your so called rape laws) did not directly result in the good times ( greater prosperity) then they don't really offset each other(people can have greater prosperity without condoning rape).

Stolen generation? Some new name for something we are all aware of in other terms? I am not crazy, but, you imply that anyone living in times where something you don't condone takes place shouldn't really be enjoying themselves while others are suffering.

Speaking of suffering, had the suffragettes that fought for women's rights had the same communications network you have today, they'd be in India fighting for the rights of those women, not merely sitting back thinking about donating a substantial portion of their own income or much better time. So, call me all the names you want, it doesn't matter. All I tried to point out is that the things that people feel nostalgia for in the past aren't the bad things that existed alongside of them.

Consider the issues of the day in colonial times in the US, some of the representatives were firmly against slavery, didn't practice slavery, but, put up with it in others in order to put up a united front against their oppressors.

You are primitive in your temper tantrum ranting. Nostalgia isn't as dangerous as you presume. I've tried to point that out with examples. You remain obtuse and become combative. You presume to occupy higher philosophical ground, but, you are mistaken.
Reply
:iconcrimsonmagpie:
CrimsonMagpie Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
Whenever anyone whinges about X past time period being better they're always, without exception, looking back with rose-tinted glasses. 
Reply
:iconnenril-tf:
Nenril-Tf Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
Romantic view of life...

" For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills "

Romaticism...the bad of society...
Reply
:iconempiredice:
empiredice Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013
I think it depends who you ask and the context. A social progressive longing for the 50's is probably thinking only of economics. They usually make that clear though. A conservative is more likely thinking of the 50's (abhorrent) gender roles.

I mean that's the reality isn't it? Socially speaking, the 50's was a bad time for anyone who wasn't a white straight (was that even an issue then?) Christian man, is it shocking that conservatives are propping it up as a golden age? There may be some romanticizing to it but for the most part this is what they want.
Reply
:iconaapis:
Aapis Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013
Social conservatives claim they don't want those things, but the things they do want either result in or encourage things like marital rape, taking children from unwed mothers, etc. You'll probably never hear anyone say "yeah, all children born out of wedlock should be put under state care" but you will hear people say things like "unwed mothers are statistically more likely to be bad at raising children because there are no men around and children need male influences, blah blah I suck penis".

Personally, I think those people are idiots.
Reply
:iconkalinka-shadows:
Kalinka-Shadows Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013
The future is better than the past, and worse in others.

I used to be nostalgic for the mid 90s, I'm not now, and the reason I'm not now, because I realize that under the surface, even though the mid-90s was probably the most liberal period in US history (before I moved to Canada in 2000) I realize how it was a failed experiment. We tried to cover up and bury our racism, bigotry, hatred and religious fascism rather than confront it. The problem is this:

The U.S. is becoming a horrible, backward, violent place to live. Alot of this is because, like the Jim Jones cult, the social fabric of the US is deteriorating, because economic bullshit that the religious whackjobs that rule the US (House and Senate, mostly) is starting to fall apart. There's massive social, and political class inequality. US leaders don't really offer solutions to problems, they just scream "Jesus is the answer!" as loud as they can, so as a result the US is collapsing.
Reply
:iconcarusmm:
carusmm Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Who says Conservatives ever got over the end of slavery?
Reply
:iconcreamstar:
Creamstar Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013
Through every era of history and most cultures, philosophers and writers have claimed that their society is deteriorating and that the past was better. This is because of our upbringing. We associate our younger days as the best days. It doesn't mean society is becoming more unstable. We just miss the times when we fit in with the culture more.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
I'm more talking about people who are nostalgic for periods before they were born. Most conservatives seem to idolize the 50's, no matter their age. (probably because that's where they mindset comes from :lol:)
Reply
:iconopiumrooster:
opiumrooster Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013
yeah, i miss the good ol' days.
Reply
:iconpriteeboy:
priteeboy Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
The only thing I'd say was better about how society interacted decades ago was in general manners. Sure this didn't really matter if a man was super-polite in public yet abused or even raped his wife when he got home. But what people do in their private lifes is not in question here. I'm referring to how people seemed to actually care what others think and feel about themselves and their actions in a public environment. People couldn't waltz into a public environment looking like they are fresh from a night's worth of cocaine-induced activities. Public drunkeness and acting like a dickhead was something to actually be ashamed of, not boast about on Facebook. Parents kept their kids in line - not let them be on the brink of barging shoppers over as they scream up and down the grocery store isles at the speed of sound and never being told to stop because that would be "psychologically damaging" to punish their creative freedom like that :facepalm: We have more garbage bins in every street and public sidewalks now yet everyone still manages to just let their shit drops the moment they don't need it anymore because the next bin being 20 steps ahead is too long to hold onto that unwanted cigarette box. Bosses couldn't bother their employee's after-hours and most families needed only one parent working one 9-5 job to meet all their living requirements comfortably.

But why would I never want to live in those days? Lots of reasons really. Starting from the very fact that the further back in time you go - the more populated by religious bigots who refuse to listen to logic society is populated with. There is more racism, sexism, homophobia, disease, safety-issues (as you pointed out with road accidents) and when you think about it realistically - spinning tops or knuckle-bones just aren't as fun as, say - a Nintendo Wii. My mother frequently goes on tangents about her childhood life when she feels my brothers and I need to appreciate what we have now. It works - since her life sucked :stare:
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
"But what people do in their private lifes is not in question here."
Yes, yes it is, because that very sentence was a culturally based excuse for looking the other way and allowing domestic violence.
It was acceptable to beat, rape, and generally be the cruel owner of your wife, and it was considered private.
People saw and people knew, and those involved didn't have to hide it very much, exactly because it was private and accepted.

Lots of things were very much out in the open back then, who wouldn't be accepted today. Violence, and not just towards women, being one of them.
Reply
:iconpriteeboy:
priteeboy Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I wasn't trying to excuse it though. I was just putting it aside while analyzing more "typical" behaviour patterns of the average citizen. Since although wife-beating would have been more common then, I'm still sure there were more husbands who didn't than those who did. That could be added to my list in the second paragraph of reasons why I don't want to live in those times. A few pleases and thankyou's and people opening doors for each other isn't worth the other shit that went on then :no:
Reply
:iconsvataben:
Svataben Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Agreed! :)
Reply
:iconrandomrobskii:
RandomRobskii Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Student Filmographer
I'm with you on that. The best thing from then is the level of respect people had for their possessions, themselves, everyone and everything around them.
Reply
:iconpriteeboy:
priteeboy Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yes. People did seem more sentimental. A kid valued getting 1-2 toys for Christmas even if their parents could have afforded more. They didn't expect to wake up and see an XBox 360, a Nintendo Wii, a new bike, an iPhone and a puppy all together under the tree and then complain because they got the wrong-coloured bike :tantrum:. People seemed like they actually cared about seeing family and held onto things that were given to them. People were (generally) smart enough to ration for the future and not live it up big because that's what they want now which results in them running into inescapable debt before their mid-20's (nothing like someone who complains they can't pay the bills but then goes out and spends $350 on concert tickets :X) Songs were about love and life experiences, not sex and drug trips. TV shows weren't glorifying rich spoiled sluts and their douchebag boyfriends either because even the teenagers of that time weren't shallow enough to watch that shit and if they tried to emulate it I'm sure their parents would have given them a well-deserved smack across the face :slap:
Reply
:iconmaddmatt:
maddmatt Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013
I don't know of anyone who thinks everything that happened in a former time was acceptable.

But degradation of society in other ways is not progress even though it is change either.

It is not an all or nothing proposition.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
While commonly that is true, I have heard people claiming nothing new is good. :shrug:
Reply
Add a Comment: