Watch period drama

>Watch period drama
>Become absolutely disgusted at the state of the modern world
>Gone are the days of a virgin girl marrying her husband at 18 and starting a family
>Now people shop around for years, hopping from one cock or vagina to the next until you find another dried up degenerate to start a family with at the young age of 35
People have always cheated, but now you're considered weird if you haven't slept with more than 1 person in your life. It's considered reckless and scummy to start a family before your wife's hairline starts to recede.

Attached: Poldark_4_1 (2).jpg (704x469, 48K)

>Watch

And they call it progress.

It's easy to romanticize the old days when you see the lives of aristocracy and higher classes instead of the life of the poor.

In regards of sex, you're entitled to make your own choices. There's still people like that, both men and women, both mostly outside out the US.

You are entitled to make your own choices, but we live in a culture where people are encouraged to make bad lifesyle choices.

Read a book

I know. But it was always the case. Humanity is fucked up, it's not just our time.

Reading books won't make him less disgusted with the state of modern world. Unless he reads really shitty ones.

I’m just trying to keep this on topic

but period dramas are products of the modern world

Humanity didn't start in the 1960's.
The Sexual Revolution changed many things and the last 20 years also did.

All television is fantasy. Don't be a fool.

Yes, but society did become different (and for the worse) after the Sexual Revolution.

That's a romanticized version of things. Affairs were just as common back then.

Please, bitch. If you scraped your knee, you’d die of infection—that is, if you weren’t shitting yourself from cholera first. Not to mention the rotting teeth and stench.

You’d be begging for modernity before you knew it.

>people shop around for years, hopping from one cock or vagina to the next until you find another dried up degenerate to start a family with at the young age of 35
Was not considered the ideal lifestyle for most of history. And if you look at statistics, a relatively large proportion of people married virgin before the Sexual Revolution.

OP is not criticizing modern medicine, he is criticizing modern sexual morals.

>Gone are the days of a virgin girl marrying her husband at 18 and starting a family

Maybe for you.

You win some you lose some.

>be OP
>born to a poor villager household
>fall in love with a village girl and want to marry her
>her father says "no"
>big money sir Becket comes to town and marries her in a week
>join the army in hope rank will raise your social status
>get stationed in some remote region where there are almost no young women around
>fall in love with one of the general's daughters
>he calls you to a duel
>shoots you in the neck and kills you

>be OP
>born to a poor villager household
>fall in love with a village girl and want to marry her
>her father says "no"
>big money sir Becket comes to town and fucks her, she ends up as a whore
>join the army because you have no other options
>get stationed in some remote region where there are almost no young women around
>fall in love with one of the general's daughters
>she doesn't even know you exist
>die in battle or from disease, alternatively live as crippled beggar for the rest of your life

fixed for realism

Nobles in early modern Europe would be quite promiscuous. Men for sure - whoring together with your crew was the most fun thing you could think of. Women, probably, too.

On a related note, everybody understands that OP's picr has two people who are unrealistically handsome/beautiful for any time but late 20th - early 21st century, right?

High status males from all ages and cultures were quite promiscuous. And pretty much all the women.

Kino experience reminded me of the tartar steppe. Would read the entire novel.

The promotion of casual sex as a good thing is not something very common in Europe, user. Some people think the world always worked like it does today. But there is a reason that we talk of a Sexual Revolution in the second half of the 20th century. It is called a revolution exactly because it changed things. Not because they stayed the same.

People literally believe this.
Even disregarding cultural changes, technological changes should give you pause before saying this.
Think before opening your mouth
>Looool things don't actually change
boiling frog motherfucker

This shows a huge lack of knowledge of history. You come from /his/ don't you?

?

>Gone are the days of a virgin girl marrying her husband at 18 and starting a family

As if they'd want to marry you of all people?

Attached: 1570892278012.jpg (226x247, 8K)

>would be quite promiscuous
>The promotion of casual sex as a good thing

Moving the goal posts I see.

Because this lack of historical knowledge is mostly common on /his/. For every person with a decent knowledge of history you have eight who have a "meme knowledge" of it.

fpbp

We're talking about trends, not individuals you bitter little cunt.

I didn't say that, idiot. You are thinking of a fantasy world. Not everything was a Jane Austen novel. Read something like The Decameron and tell me degeneracy wasn't common back then.

>t.OP the massive daydreaming faggot

Degeneracy was far less common before the Sexual Revolution than after it.
A pretty large percentage of the Western population had one lifetime sexual partner before the Sexual Revolution. Now this percentage is very low. And probably a large part of it is not even Western, but Muslim.

I was more interested in you providing examples that counter my notion of high status males being promiscuous in all ages.

>implying the mudpackers ever mattered

People in early modern Europe were less promiscuous than people today are. Specially women. Or do you think most nobles would be OK with marrying the town bicycle or having their daughters becoming the town bicycle?

You literally said that affairs were always as common as they are today.

t. busted up old slag with a dirty cunt

poldark is vile cringe

>Or do you think most nobles would be OK with marrying the town bicycle or having their daughters becoming the town bicycle?
Again with the morals. This has nothing to do with our discussion.

In the old Roman Republic, being promiscuous was considerate effeminate and weak.
German pagans were not promiscuous. Some chieftains did have more than one wife, but that was due to marriage alliances rather than lust. And sex outside marriage was seem very negatively.

Do you really think the average early modern noblewoman would be a huge slut who would sleep with tons of people before marrying?

D

>before your wife's hairline starts to recede

Reality sucks.

You are arguing about the circumstances. Yeah, back then it wasn't acceptable to have sex before marriage, but the circumstances were different. The degeneracy was there, it just existed in a different form. Most young males would visit brothels three times a week. Most young women, forced into marriage by their parents, would take any opportunity to flirt or create an affair with young males.

You just sound like an entitled brat that just wants virgin girl for some reason, like being born before 20th century would have been a given for you. Unless you would have been born in nobility, you would have suffered ten times as much as the so called modern incels.

Yet high status individuals in both the Roman Republic and Germanic pagan societies fucked around plenty. Prostitutes (Rome) and slaves (both).

>Most young males would visit brothels three times a week. Most young women, forced into marriage by their parents, would take any opportunity to flirt or create an affair with young males.
False

>actually getting to know a person you’re considering spending the rest of your life with is a bad thing

Again shifting the goalposts.

ending duels was a mistake. now instead of settling disputes permanently you're encouraged to bargain, postpone, or keep them to yourself and stay resentful. maybe i'm just romantic, but not being able to solve things 'legally' probably ended up causing more harm than honorable deaths.

I quite disillusioned with life.
I doubt the good old times ever really existed.
Women and Men have always had promiscuous sex .
The only thing I agree with is marrying so late is bad and can only lead to sick malformed children or no children at all.
Not to mention unmarried childless women are more likely to get endometrial cancer

Alright you daft cunt, keep living in your fantasy world, and being bitter about the real one.

Unless you were the King or a very important duke or count (which were a small minority of nobles), affairs were not acceptable either. And if you were the wife of one of those guys, they wouldn't accept you having affairs either.

Louis XIV was not amused when his nephew cheated on his wife (who was his bastard daughter).

>Boiling frog

Most women didn't have arranged marriages.

They didn't. Fucking around was frowned upon in their culture.
Those that did it in Rome were considered lesser men.

Sure, and that's why duels were so common back then.

You said early modern noblewomen were probably quite promiscuous.

Do you think most duels were over affairs?

honour

>early modern noblewomen were probably quite promiscuous
>early modern noblewoman would be a huge slut who would sleep with tons of people before marrying

So, what exactly do you think someone who is "quite promiscuous" do?
Marry as a virgin and sleeps solely with his or her spouse the entire life and with procreative purposes?

Neither were they autonomous.

Yeah, most were.

LITERATURE

Attached: 1570819022590.webm (960x540, 1.54M)

Ah with the hyperboles. You don't think there is a difference between "a huge slut who would sleep with tons of people" and "quite promiscious", especially from the perspective of the age.

It takes a year at most to know someone well enough to want to marry them, shopping around 15 different people dating or fucking them all is not how you find a wife/husband.

Being promiscuous means you sleep with tons of people.

People who marry virgin have happier marriages even after controlling for religiosity.

They weren't. Nobles dueled for plenty of reasons, most of which you would consider petty.

Historically anything outside of one would count as promiscious for women, yes?

You said nobles on "early modern Europe were quite promiscuous", implying that people were always as promiscuous as they are nowadays

>implying that people were always as promiscuous as they are nowadays

No. The explicit message was that they were not restricted to one sexual partner.

Yes, it was. You were trying to argue things didn't change from that era.

Conflicts arise over two things. Money and love.

>Most young males would visit brothels three times a week.
Surely you have a citation for such an extraordinary, specific claim?

you forgot Power

Yeah, it's called "decades of literature and history".

Some people dueled over how they rated poems, user

>centuries of literature and history

fixed that for ya

Ok, no evidence.

Attached: F u c k i n g k e k.jpg (1280x720, 57K)

>The promotion of casual sex as a good thing is not something very common in Europe, user
The nations of France, Britain and the Med would disagree with you user

Attached: 1556200399177.jpg (819x1428, 239K)

>>Gone are the days
My wife and I waited for marriage. It's possible today, it just requires self-discipline and that is being engineered out of people to maximise consumption and profit.

I meant it historically

Guys fooling around had no social stigma at the time, so long as it didn’t compromise the social order. If you were upper class and went to brothels/ fucked your maids it was considered perfectly normal
Venereal diseases were damned widespread

Not the guy who wrote it but still remember what my grandfather used to tell me and write in private letters.
For an example anyone could have access to, mistresses were mentioned in Saint-Simon’s memoirs and pretty much any French 18th century novels

The undetailed, unverified, and definitely unexaggerated sexual exploits of your grandfather, and a bunch of novels designed to titillate, are not evidence. By that metric, one can conclude that Superman is real.

They married virgin and had thinly veiled, socially tolerated affairs.

Will people in 2,300 believe Japanese people were hit by trucks and moved to different worlds?

>>Watch period drama
Wow. Not even reading. Shouldn't this be on Sup Forums.

Milton wrote the Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce in the 17th Century. One life, One ( Cock | Vagina | Butthole | Fleshlight ) hasn't been a thing for a while.