BreakPoint Blog

Banner
Banner
The More Things Change . . .

I find this intriguing and frustrating at the same time. The stuff about the declining age of puberty is, I think, vital to our understanding of culture and the rearing of kids.

Kids, by which I mean anyone under the age of 33, are caught in a biological and cultural pincer: they are becoming sexually aware at a younger age while, at the same time, being expected to postpone marriage for economic reasons. Now, if we disabuse ourselves of our eyewash (yes!) about the past, the way society dealt with it was turning a blind hypocritical eye to male sexuality, i.e., prostitutes and other "fallen women." The double standard meant that only one of the parties had to wait. (Average marriage age for men has gone up and down since the late eighteenth century, mostly driven by economic considerations.) That will no longer hold up. We never gave much thought to what made previous mores possible -- we told ourselves that people "back then" were somehow better/more moral than us. Bwahaha! NO THEY WEREN'T!


Comments:

I didn't see the quote you highlight
Too bad b/c the rest of the interview was horrible. Is that what really passes as science in the social sciences? The word I'd use for most of it it is "fiction".

However, you highlight a great quote, "Kids, by which I mean anyone under the age of 33, are caught in a biological and cultural pincer: they are becoming sexually aware at a younger age while, at the same time, being expected to postpone marriage for economic reasons."

And by "great" I mean it's something I've been saying for several years.

I was certainly pleased that Early had a broadcast some months back encouraging marriage at _younger_ ages.

Many Christians have been explicitly advocating postponing marriage, then they scratch their heads at the consequences.
"We're evolving against evolutionary tendencies"??
Roberto, I hope someone well-schooled in evolution (like, say, Ben W) doesn't read the linked article and go ballistic over all the scientific malapropisms contained therein.

Is your main point that someone in his thirties like Joseph is actually the best match for someone just entering her teens like the Virgin Mary?

Or was your whole post really just a reason to say "Kids, by which I mean anyone under the age of 33" as a way to score some points with our Beloved Editor?