How many people have you dated in your lifetime? More likely than not, that number is much lower than it would have been if you had grown up in the United States in during World War II or in the post-war era.
The dating world in the 1940s was very different than it is today. While today, most people date one person exclusively until that relationship falls apart, in the ‘40s, a typical teenager went on a date with a different person each weekend.
Dating in the ‘40s was driven by popularity, and it was believed that a person's popularity was determined by how “in demand” he/she was for a date. This, of course, meant that people strived to go on dates with as many different people as possible.
Dates were always scheduled days - or sometimes even weeks! - in advance, and, in order to give off the impression that she was desirable, a girl would never schedule a date for the same day that a boy asked her; instead, she would usually insist that she already had another date that night – even if it was not true – but would tell the boy asking her on a date that she could pencil him in for another weekend. Yes, at that time, it was expected that the boy would always ask the girl for a date.
Dating a lot of different people before deciding upon one with whom to “go steady,” or date exclusively, was highly encouraged by parents. Parents wanted their children to gain the experience of dating many different kinds of people so that their children could get a better idea of the kinds of qualities they desired in a long-term partner. In fact, “going steady” with somebody was something usually done only by the most mature of teenagers and young adults, and deciding to “go steady” with one person was a decision that was not to be taken lightly. By the time a person reached early adulthood, he/she had gone on dates with a wide variety of people and had probably gone steady with a few of them, too.
The following is a social instructional film from the early 1950s whose target audience was the teenage population. This film explores the issue of deciding whether or not two people are ready to “go steady” and talks about the pros and cons of exclusively dating one person. As you watch, see which cultural values from the ‘40s/early ‘50s you can infer, and think about how these values could have played a role in that particular society’s ideologies about dating.
What were the pros and cons of the dating practices of the ‘40s? Would you rather have dated this way when you were growing up, or do you prefer “dating” the way it is now? Why?
Image Source
Recommend
Comments (25)
Uh...doesn't seem like much has changed since the 40s. Plenty of people still date more than one person at a time, including myself.
@Chibi_Son_Gokou@xanga - This may apply more to the younger crowd (IDK how old you are) but the assumption today is that you're automatically exclusive, whereas it didn't used to be. "Going steady" and being exclusive meant you were more serious about one another.
Personally, I think the old way makes so much more sense.
Kissing and even holding hands had more meaning back then.
@VampireOfSeduction@xanga - definitely have never seen this until about 3 months ago, and that was only with one person. i seriously thought this article was going to be the opposite when i saw the title--that in the 40s, people were super exclusive, didn't date around, and got married when they were like 18.
Interesting. I like this. People seem to be so scared of teaching their kids about dating...my parents always encouraged me to be in exclusive relationships because they didn't want me to appear to be a slut, which, to 13 year olds means that you go out with and possibly kiss more than one guy. I wish it had been different. I would have saved a lot of time if I wasn't so scared of not having one guy be the center of my universe as a teenager.
Yeah... yeah...
Parents teaching their kids to date around...
Everyone wants the best for theirs and their own until the pointless competition results in bottlenecks in social statuses and inbreeding until you have what are essentially the worldly "hard working" class with all the truly valuable qualities and the detached "delicate class" so that eventually Titanic-esque, Aladdin and Princess Jasmine, Lady and the Tramp relationships become all the rage. Society throwing itself through loops for lack of anything better to do.
Just play the game, right?
*sighs*
"Dates were always scheduled days - or sometimes even weeks! - in advance, and, in order to give off the impression that she was desirable, a girl would never schedule a date for the same day that a boy asked her; instead, she would usually insist that she already had another date that night – even if it was not true – but would tell the boy asking her on a date that she could pencil him in for another weekend."
It shows a lot of integrity, doesn't it? Some might call that "lying", or a new term I picked up recently, "subterfuge".
Women have been the carrot-on-a-stick for too long with no reward in sight.
http://youtu.be/8sKbvN--oH8
"Here we are
Hanging onto strains of greed and blues
Break the chain then we break down
Oh it's not real if you don't feel it
Unspoken expectations
Ideals you used to play with
They've finally taken shape for us."
is that why jack the ripper killed those whores
@P0RCELA1N_D0LL@xanga - From what I've seen on the History Channel, Jack the Ripper might've been a whore. *shrugs*
I guess I am old fashion after all. I would never date exclusively when I was young only because I didn't want intimacy. It's also true that the more guys I dated, the more I found out what I wanted or not wanted in my mate's traits.
@T3hZ10n@xanga - they want to tarnish his rep, so that he'll get mad and unveil himself to clear the rumors, then they'll catch him. never!
While I believe that this is the way parents wanted kids to date...I wonder what percentage of the time it worked out that way. I say this because I know a lot of people who were teens at that time (well, I did know them, lots of them have passed away) and some did as described here, but many married very young to high school sweet hearts, ran off with an older man against their parents wishes, got pregnant and married in a hurry...etc.
I do think there was a big difference in expectations, which has both pros and cons, but in the end, people are people. They fall in love, get jealous, pair off and get busy with it.
I think the idea of having non-exclusive dates is a great idea in that it does allow you to get a better idea of what and who you really like. But it wouldn't work for young people today unless everyone was 'in' on it- as far as I can tell, if a girl went on a date with a guy, his friends would then feel (with some exceptions, of course) that he couldn't date her as well, and exclusivity would be assumed unless one of the 'partners' said otherwise. Due to that, if you wanted to date multiple people, you'd need to get them all from different sources. It would be hard to date several people you knew from school, for example.
hmm.. I was taught to not have a boyfriend till I finished college because boys were considered distractions.
I guess this article makes some sense since women in this time weren't the expected to finish/go to college or enter the workforce. Women were to be wed early since 25 is to old to get married and have children and young men were expected to raise a family, so looking for a partner was a priority.I probably prefer the dating process in the 40s since it's a lot less complicated. Today.. dating, being exclusive and being in a relationship have completely different meanings.
@TheNotoriousGOD@xanga - Really? Odd. I graduated high school in 2007 for what it's worth. I'm pretty sure most adults (maybe more so in the city where there's more to do and more people to do it with) do the dating around thing, but in school, it was 'hey will you go out with me?' and if the other person said yes, that was it until you broke up two days/weeks/months later and moved on to someone else. Really dumb if you ask me. You should definitely have noted the 'automatically exclusive' implications from some of the other datingish posts, though.
I did not date in the 40s.. I was not even born then. BUT, I do think that it is best to date many, many different people as you are growing up...even dating them all at once.
Serial monogamy dating just isn't wise to pick a lifetime partner. I cannot understand this one boy/one girl at a time business before you are even married!!! Too much pressure, too few choices...
Makes no sense to me!
Christy
I feel things are about the same now as they were then. Only slightly different really.
And so basically, I don't really care for the dating scene much at all... And definitely don't like a dating scene where women are crazy hypoagents and men are crazy hyperagents.
I prefer more give-and-take and less pedestalization of the female sex.
Love this, minus the chicks being liars...
@Manic_Butterflies@xanga - I agree. This is so wonderful because it seems like you would truly get to know who you're dating without it having to get serious quickly. It also seems light and fun and easy. Currently, the trend seems to be that after a couples dates a few times, they become hermetically sealed to one another. There's hardly any time in between the first date and serious relationship drama.
I could never do it in the 40s style. I've only had crushes on like 4 guys in my whole life and I'm 20. One of those crushes is my one & only boyfriend who I've been dating for 3 and a 1/2 years (4 in February). I've known him since 6th grade and crushed on him on and off till we started dating and I like it my way. I love being in love with one of my best friends.
Well, really, things haven't changed too much. This practice was called dating back then, now it's called No strings attached and whatever else the world calls it. Frankly, I like being a one woman man and am glad that I think the way I do. Going on dates with different people just seems like more trouble than it's worth. My grandma always told me to play the fields when I was younger and all I have to say to that is "No". Just the thought of dating more than one person makes me cringe. Then again, I'm also a straight shooter and I don't tolerate games. If I felt one slight bit of competition I'd cast you off to the side and forget that you even existed. I'm happily "going steady" with someone and we're planning to get married within a year and a half. Old dating would have ultimately led to my suicide if I was alive back then and still had the same mindset I do now. But, I'm just a guy ranting on the internet, too
I think that they had it RIGHT in the 40s-50s. That is what dating should be whenever your in the single world...That is how you decide what you like and don't like in a guy! I tried to do that whenever I was dating in high school and in college but the guys would get jealous so quick and easily and take it as if I were cheating...when really I was just trying to DATE and have fun! Dating more than one person at a time makes life exciting, you never know what your weekend is going to hold!
I am happily married now, but I know that my husband and I wouldn't appreciate our relationship this much if we hadn't had dated and experienced as much as we did in the past! :)
Also, dating did NOT equal having sex with someone. It was hanging out and having a good time, and maybe going as far as a good night kiss.
@VampireOfSeduction@xanga - oooohhh i did not realize this was referring to high school. okay, that makes a lot more sense.
also, didn't you say you were married? what the fuck are you doing married at your age???
@prettyinprinciple@xanga - haha, my parents taught me the same thing. i can't say i am 100% thrilled with how hard i worked in undergrad, but at the very least, it paid off because i had the pick of the litter for grad school.
in the long run, it seems that mentality may have resulted in an explosion of promiscuity though.
@TheNotoriousGOD@xanga - I assumed high school based on the mention of teenagers and parents, but I could be wrong.
Um... I'm... being married? We've lived together since a few months after graduation and we went through enough crap to know we're in this for life. Yeah, it's mostly a piece of paper, but there's social status, some legal implications, and a free name change involved (this was important to us - the name change, not the 'free' part), so why not?
wow this was interesting !
not much has changed though .