Darlinges, I have been to two more parties since I wrote. I am utterly exhausted and have a meelyon dishes to wash. So chat happily in the combox. Here is a topic: Those of us born after 1985 have learned from the mistakes of the generations born between 1940 and 1975.
Go for it, future of the human race!
10 comments:
Those of us born after 1975 and before 1985 have learned that the generations born before 1975 tend to ignore us and those born after 1985 find us irrelevant.
What? Me bitter about being excluded from this discussion? ;)
I was born IN 1985, and this post pretty much sums up a lot of what I've learned in the last few years, about myself, my family, the Church, and society-at-large....and much of what I've learned was reinforced by this lovely blog here.
So, to answer the question, yes, indeed: I've learned, and am still learning, from the crazy stuff (and some good stuff I guess) of the previous 2 generations.
Nah, I this folks born in the 70's are relevant. Just the folks who were past the age of logic in the 60's & 70's didn't always use it. (tee hee)
My brother and I (both born after 1985) have spent many an hour discussing this - though it's pointless discussion as we're in complete agreement. Let's just say our favourite documentary is a BBC one called "Why I hate the sixties"...
Indeed. I look at the moral mess my parents' generation landed us in, and I cringe. And get angry. But mostly cringe.
Hey, Father B, try having been born in 1971. Now that's historically irrelevant--although I wonder if...Nope--Kurt Cobain was born in 1967. What about Noel Gallagher? Dang! 1967! What about Liam? 1972! Argh!
Hm. I don't think we've learned our lesson. Women and men's roles in romance have been practically reversed, marriage is not the norm, lasting marriages even less so. I think we're, in fact, worse off than we were in the '60s. The '60s was just when it got started.
My biggest beef is with the feminists who complain that men can't be relied upon. The single mothers who had their children out of wedlock and are surprised that the father has disappeared. They don't seem to realize that by allowing men to "get the milk for free," they all but created the Dead-Beat Dad.
Furthermore, feminism propogated the idea that not only do we not need men, we are superior to them. We don't allow them to practice their manly virtues that foster chivalry and respect for women because we can darn well do it ourselves.
Men will do what they think will please the women in their life, even if the driving force is their sexuality. When women start making more demands that men be men, (and i mean real demands-- not just berating and nagging) maybe feminism will turn around.
Being a woman born in 1987, I have to be honest, I hate the fact that I HAVE to go to college and get a job, or be a waitress for the rest of my life, and that I have to provide for myself or die. I hate that it's scandalous to want to be provided for by a man so that I can focus on motherhood, I don't like that I can't live with my parents while Single without looking like a bum, I hate that wanting men to be men and pay for dinner means that I'm objectifying him.
But I LOVE being Catholic in such a world where it is scandalous to be Catholic.
I've never regretted having to make a living. If one good thing came from the feminist movement, it is that women no longer have to be at the mercy of marriage.
The whole idea behind being a Seraphic Single is that you don't HAVE to get married if you don't want to. And furthermore, a husband is not a guarantee, (and you may be left widowed) so women should learn how to provide for themselves and keep themselves occupied.
I also don't think it's quite as scandalous to be a stay at home mom as it used to be as recently as the '90s. And even if it were, being raised by a SAHM has steeled me against such criticism.
@RMVB - Well said!
"But I LOVE being Catholic in such a world where it is scandalous to be Catholic."
It's not easy, but I get a kick out of being truly counter-cultural.
Post a Comment