Is It More Difficult To Find A Mate In 2010 Than In 1910?

[QuestionTime]

This thread may have been done before, and if so I apologize. Anyway...

Someone commented to me once something like this (I don't remember it exactly): "Why are people single for so long now-a-days? My grandfather met my grandmother at the place where she worked and he kept going to visit her and they ended up married."

Now - as I mentioned - I don't remember exactly how her comment was worded, but her point was that it seems much more difficult today than it used to be to find a mate. This would make an excellent topic for discussion because it's a fantastic question: Why is it so much harder to find a mate now than it was in the past? Are people just too picky? Too self-centered perhaps? Is it just because our society has different perspectives on dating and finding the right person then they had back at that time?

What is the difference now? We have more social networking options now then ever in history and people can't seem to find the right person. I don't get it.

Thoughts?

Quest

 

[AJ52]

Are people just too picky? Too self-centered perhaps?


^^^ i know a couple of christians that wont go with girls that have a "lil thickness"or chubby....ppl are too worried about looks..and dont care if that person is an airhead,as long as they look good..

 

[QuestionTime]

Are people just too picky? Too self-centered perhaps?


^^^ i know a couple of christians that wont go with girls that have a "lil thickness"or chubby....ppl are too worried about looks..and dont care if that person is an airhead,as long as they look good..

A short but sweet response!

These weight concerns are true, and I struggle with this problem also... despite the fact that I am overweight! :O

Back in 1910, I don't think that there were many people who were overweight and this can be one cause. If the external was attractive - which in those days would have been the case with a greater percentage of the populace - then that could be one reason why things clicked better then.

Yes, perhaps people are more interested in how they will look with a certain person, rather than finding someone who is a good mate. People are interested in more vain qualities then in the past, undoubtedly.

Any other reasons?

Quest

 

[Gabriel777]

I think the decline of morality plays a big part in it. Everyone sleeping with everyone nowadays and homosexuality on the rise.

 

[QuestionTime]

I think the decline of morality plays a big part in it. Everyone sleeping with everyone nowadays and homosexuality on the rise.

So you are saying that all the good men are taken... by other men?

Quest

 

[Gabriel777]

Same thing would go for men, the good women are taken by other women because they see the good men taken by other men.

 

[QuestionTime]

Same thing would go for men, the good women are taken by other women because they see the good men taken by other men.

I gotta start looking for a good man then!

Quest

 

[Gabriel777]

There is a new thing here where i live where in the elementary and middle schools boys are having sexual relations with other boys because they can't get a girl. What also shocked me was when i was in the mall the other day I walked by a clothing store and it had posters with two guys hugging ready to kiss and same for girls.

 

[Pheonix]

Yes we have more social networking options today but very few are face to face. Most you need to be far too secretive and withholding just to be safe. There are few safe places to meet anyone these days. It used to be that you met people in church and the town was a community that everyone knew everyone. Even in cities, the neighbourhood was a community and you knew everyone.

Its also true that people are far too interested in outward appearance. Most guys figure they should expect the 90lb soaking wet hot pinup type girlfriend and so limit their options. Also people are far too busy these days for social type things one a regular basis, or can't afford to go outside their current social group.

In my case I live in the country and can't really afford to go anywhere. I work, eat and sleep. That's about it.

 

[eugenius]

1910 had its own problems. Women were treated like second class citizens, and etc. Every century has its problems. But I agree that things are messed up now a days and that people care too much about looks, although this has been a problem throughout all 10,000 years or whatever of human history.

I noticed that guys think that girls are pretty when they look sweet, kind and gentle. Emphasis on the word look there. Its very ironic that this is what we find beautiful when most girls who LOOK like that are neither sweet, nor kind nor gentle. They only look like they are. And often the girls who are overweight and etc are the ones who are kind and sweet.

What is beautiful to me is when a girl has intelligence, is a decent moral person, loves children and small animals, and has strong faith in God. Now thats beauty. Amen?

 

[Not_The_Righteous]

Part of the problem might be that adolescence now lasts close to two decades, where 30 year olds still haven't figured themselves out or become comfortable enough with themselves to pursue healthy relationships.

For what it is worth, I see this... desperate yearning... more online than in real life. In real life, most Christian people my age (28) are married, working toward it, and not running into a problem of finding no "good christian" people to have relationships with.

Heck, I didn't get married til I was 26. The funny thing is that now I look back and wonder what I was so worried about to begin with.

You need to make yourself emotionally avaliable, get really comfortable with yourself, and be in circles where meeting the right kind of person happens all the time.

I met my wife @ church. That's pretty much how most people I know met theirs... church, or a campus ministry in college, or a singles ministry afterwards.

I don't know if it's "harder" per se, but things are different than they were in 1910. I hear a lot of people blaming the problem on people being too concerned with "looks," but lets face it - that isn't a new issue. See Jacob.

And I may get put in front of the firing squad for saying this here, but looks do matter. We're all wired to like what we life. "Attractiveness," which goes well beyond looks, is a real issue. Say what you will about other powers of "choice," but you can't really "choose" who is attractive to you and who isn't. It's that collision of looks, personality, passions, etc. that draw us to one another. I didn't choose to be attracted to my wife - she simply was and I responded accordingly by pursuing a relationship with her. Guess this is the unpopular part of the news... you've got to do what you can to be "attractive." Not just looks, but personality, passions, avaliability, priorities and all the rest. You can't change the rules of the game, but you can play your cards as well as you're able.

I don't mean to come across as uncompassionate - me being a married guy and all. But it wasn't too long ago I was in that place and looking back it's... different... to reflect upon these struggles.

 

[MahogonySnail]

I think it helped that in 1910 everyone dressed and looked the same. These days there's too much choice.

 

[squidmike]

maybe back in 1910 people were more direct than they are now. perhaps there was a clarity to how people spoke back then. or maybe the way men and women are so much more different now than they were in 1910. men were in charge a womans "place'was in the kitchen they couldn't vote or even work to provide for thier families. now women are not only expected to give birth and raise children butn provide for thier families as well. and now you'll find men who raise children but are not the providers they once were. it is harder for men to figure what women wants in a man and are told directly what is expected of them even then i supect that most men don't want to hear that from a woman.according to the Word of God the man is the head of the house. having said that,in todays society there is a strong misunderstanding of what the Word is saying. because if the man loves God more than himself then he will want to put the woman first because he will do whatever it takes to please the woman,because he will want to keep her.(marry)

 

[NodMyHeadLikeYeah]

If everyone would just lower their standards we could all find a mate.

 

[karuna]

I agree with the idea of too much choice. Back then, you knew the field was fairly limited and accepted some approximation of good. Now, every little thing can be improved on. We won't settle for 95% if there's a 95.1% out there.

 

[embraceswampcreature]

One important thing to remember about 1910 is that this was in the heart of the Victorian Era. Marriage was not the soul searching process it is today; it was a duty rather than a choice. If a daughter did not get married and become the ward of her husband, she was still the ward of her parents until they died off or she could somehow produce her own income, which was basically impossible, and not attractive to middle-class women anyways. Another thing to think about is the sheer variety we have available today causes us to expect more out of a spouse. In 1910, options were limited to the people you could meet face to face, thus the threshold was lowered significantly. And now that this wider variety of marital options is open to us today, many find it much harder to sift through the people they know, and find a person who's life image corresponds to your own.

I don't know whether it was better to marry in 1910 or now, but there's certainly a lot more freedom today, which I personally appreciate!

 

[littleRay]

I believe that in the world our standards were higher and our morals lower, then again I'm 48 and never been married. Maybe my standards were a bit to high.

 

[Walt]

You have to recognize that back then it was not just expected to be married and have children early but necessary for survival. Most of the population was rural and in order to survive you had to have kids to help you out.

 

[QuestionTime]

You have to recognize that back then it was not just expected to be married and have children early but necessary for survival. Most of the population was rural and in order to survive you had to have kids to help you out.

This seems to be a powerful and common consensus; that marriage was a necessity back in 1910 compared to today. Now-a-days, marriage is treated like an option in our society.

I do believe this is a satanic influence however that has reduced the importance of marriage. This downplay of marriage occurs in the media constantly!

So probably the most powerful difference we have discovered in this thread, is that people today are less willing to take what is immediately available for marriage, and are instead picky to the extreme. The consequence of this being they remain single for much longer.

Anyone else long for the simple life again?

Quest

 

[QuestionTime]

If everyone would just lower their standards we could all find a mate.

How about we just drop names into a hat? Anyone?

Then maybe like Christmas parties in work environments, you can steal someone's mate up to three times. lol

Quest