Nostalgia run amok

I don't know about you but lately I've seen a lot of forwarded e-mails that sing the praises of yesterday and yesteryear, and personally I'm getting a bit tired of it. It's strange how we tend to idealize the past and view it through highly distorted rose-colored lenses, many times forgetting the bad that went along with the good. Often the text of these e-mails laments the passage of years and expresses a desire to return to a "simpler time". I believe that the past wasn't simpler or better, it is merely familiar in contrast to the unknown future. Perhaps some find it preferable to return to a familiar (if not truly ideal) past, instead of finding the courage to face an unknown and uncertain future. It is in this spirit that I present a rebuttal to all the "Norman Rockwell images through rose-colored glasses" pieces currently floating around the 'net.

A clear view at the idealized images of the past reveals that they hide a lot of pain, ugliness, inequality, prejudice, hatred and just plain fear. Instead of glorifying the past we need to celebrate how far we've come.

So kids today swim in pools instead of lakes and streams? While many older people may reminisce fondly about the "old swimming hole" they also shudder in fear at the memory of Polio, which could strike down healthy children literally overnight and was terribly contagious especially in humid environments (like the "old swimming hole"). Parents lived in fear of this crippling or sometimes fatal illness striking their children. This is a fear that today's parents do not know, thanks to the progress medical science has made.

So most families need two incomes to get by and both parents work? Unrealistic tv-generated images of Donna Reed aside, the benefits of this trend far outweigh any harm. First, in the past women were financially dependent on their husbands. They had very little financial power, few had their own financial history and credit history, few owned property. In short, many women were paupers who could be easily controlled and dominated by financial means. Many had to endure loveless or abusive marriages because they literally had nowhere else to go and no way to earn a living. Today most women have marketable skills that give them independence, pride, self-esteem and the ability to support themselves.

Women from way-back-when who didn't have jobs had no savings of their own, no retirement plan, and since they didn't work outside the home, no Social Security. This meant that if their husbands failed to provide adequately for them, these women often entered widowhood destitute and dependent on family or friends for their very survival. Today women have their Social Security, 401K's and IRA's in their own names, plus investment accounts that may rival or exceed those of their husbands, and many women can look forward to a safe and secure retirement thanks to their own efforts and foresight.

Women from way-back-when who didn't work outside the home had no choice but to model this particular gender role to their children, which reinforced the stereotype of "women's work". Often this gender role modeling effectively limited their daughters' ambitions by demonstrating that this was all women were capable of doing and being, that a woman's domain - kirche, kinder und kuchen - was eternally and indelibly predefined. These attitudes prevailed far longer than I care to think of - I'm not that old but when I was young I heard a lot about "jobs that were appropriate for women." According to my Mom I had four paths to choose from - nurse, secretary, teacher or housewife. Today because the vast majority of women maintain paid employment, either in the home as a telecommuter or the owner of a business, or outside the home, little girls grow up in a world of much wider possibilities. Instead of four possible paths they have four million and counting! Our daughters learn that they can do anything they set their minds to, by seeing their mothers do anything they set their minds to!

Lots of those nostalgia-glorifying e-mails mention discipline, and they usually talk about how kids got spanked all the time, both at school and at home, and correllated that with better standards of behavior. The last e-mail of this sort that I received even spoke of how neighbors felt free to administer corporal punishment to other people's children caught misbehaving. I'm sorry but I do not understand advocating the mass physical abuse of children. Violence only creates anger and more violence.

More about education: somehow the nostalgia-mongers always forget that during this "oh-so-wonderful" time there was also segregation. White and black drinking fountains, entrances, restrooms, hospitals and schools. What kind of a wonderful world was it when people were automatically excluded due to the color of their skin? Fortunately by the time I came along all of that nonsense had ended and I was able to grow up racially color-blind. We're still suffering the last vestiges of racism, but it is my fond hope that in another couple of generations when people think of 'race' they'll associate it with 'human', not skin color. BTW, did you know that there is only a 0.12% difference in genes that determine skin color? We are far, far more alike than we are different.

Violence seems to be rampant today, and yesteryear seems almost pastoral in comparison. But is today's society really that much more violent? No. According to data on per-capita crime, the overall crime rate today is actually lower than way back when. So why do we hear about so much of it? The main reason is the twenty-four hour news cycle and the ease with which we receive information today. This may be a mixed blessing, but then we only need remember that we can also turn it off whenever we please; we are not required to drown ourselves in news, but it is there if we want it.

Gas was cheaper way back then, but cars polluted much worse than they do today, and were far less safe (no seatbelts, airbags, etc.).

Food was cheaper but wages were much lower.

Maybe we have more diseases today than way back when, but our life spans are also massively longer today and many of the diseases we hear about today are associated with aging.

Fear and government propaganda are pretty much a wash when comparing then vs. now. Back in the 1950's school children did "Duck and Cover" drills which taught them that hiding under their desks would protect them from nuclear attack. Fear of communist aggression was standard, and encouraged by government propaganda. Today the government encourages fear of terrorism. Different name, same thing: propaganda.

About the only benefit of looking back that I can see is that prior to the Patriot Act, the civil liberties of Americans were guaranteed, while today our rights have been abridged to the point that it makes me wonder just what sort of government has evolved in the land of the formerly free and the home of the formerly brave.

Overall I consider myself fortunate to live in this day and age. I'll take progress over nostalgia anyday. However I would greatly prefer if the freedoms, rights and civil liberties we once took for granted were also included.

Please feel free to copy this post, add your own comments and pass it along. It sure would be nice to get this circulating out on the 'net to provide a dose of reality and help people to realize just how lucky we really are.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Later,
AuntieM