Who Didn’t Love Lucy?

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

CowCavalry

Corporal
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
My bad the age of consent in many states in the Nineteenth Century was 10. Many state legislatiors defend that and we have a past thread or so that discusses that.
So definitely a different mindset back in the day .Today it's between 16 to 18 although South Carolina has one exception for teenagers at 14. If I had daughters even granddaughters not digging South Carolina's law.
Leftyhunter
In an age when the average life expectancy was some 39 years (1860), I think they had different ideas about when to get started. 12-13 is pretty young though, even then I would think.
 
Last edited:

CowCavalry

Corporal
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
I'm wondering if she was the standard beauty, was a double chin desirable? Was being chubby considered the "it" body? It seems like she was on the heavier side of things. What was considered a desirable figure?
"Pleasingly Plump" was the ideal then, or so I have heard and if you look at ancient artwork, that held true pretty much until the 20th century. I think some girth and stoutness had more appeal in an age of home births and generally tougher living conditions overall. Can you imagine what the pioneer stock looked like? I would expect much of Lucy's beauty would have been in the form of a combination of her features, charm, wit, intelligence etc and would be better appreciated when animated.
 

Pete Longstreet

Private
Joined
Mar 3, 2020
"who didn't love Lucy?".... me. I don't find her attractive, and these guys seem desperate. The letters from the 19 year old are unacceptable. And if that was the norm back in the 1800's... then that's unacceptable as well. Although it was a good read, and I enjoyed it.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
If I had a daughter who was 12 getting love letters from a 19 year old I would be very concerned. That's kind of sick. If Lucy at age 32 married someone seven years older not a big deal but a 19 year old hitting on a 12 year old not good.
Leftyhunter
Consider the times.In that time there were no girls they were already considered ladies who had been very well educated in literature and the skill of diplomacy of being a lady.The ladies where more mature than the girls of today.Consider that she came from a family of very influential position .therefore had a wider range of learning than the average lady,People then did not live as long as today so she would be more mature than the nineteen year old male.At times they would be sent on what was called "The Grand Tour' of Europe to again so to broaden their insight into the world they would enter. Read the history of the Middle ages ,children of the aristocratic where much more ready to take responsibility at twelve than twenty two years old are today.Ladies mature at a higher rate that the male,talk to a thirteen boy and then talk to a eleven year old girl ,the girl is more interesting to discuss issues with.I understand and somewhat agree with your position;however,in history one must consider the time that one is reading of ,you should not place our morals into their time .May I suggest that some of the best bios.today are of women who where of what we refer to as young but were wise and skilled for their position.than the older male they married.
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Consider the times.In that time there were no girls they were already considered ladies who had been very well educated in literature and the skill of diplomacy of being a lady.The ladies where more mature than the girls of today.Consider that she came from a family of very influential position .therefore had a wider range of learning than the average lady,People then did not live as long as today so she would be more mature than the nineteen year old male.At times they would be sent on what was called "The Grand Tour' of Europe to again so to broaden their insight into the world they would enter. Read the history of the Middle ages ,children of the aristocratic where much more ready to take responsibility at twelve than twenty two years old are today.Ladies mature at a higher rate that the male,talk to a thirteen boy and then talk to a eleven year old girl ,the girl is more interesting to discuss issues with.I understand and somewhat agree with your position;however,in history one must consider the time that one is reading of ,you should not place our morals into their time .May I suggest that some of the best bios.today are of women who where of what we refer to as young but were wise and skilled for their position.than the older male they married.
Actually modern girls are physically more mature in that they are capable of bearing children much earlier then girls of the Nineteenth Century. I agree that in the Nineteenth Century the concept of a teenager wasn't the same since that concept is much more modern.
Obviously electronic devices didn't exist yet so reading if the family could afford books was far more common then today.
Still a twelve year old girl in the mid Nineteenth Century didn't even have the physical development of a modern 12 year old girl so it's difficult to conceive of how they could even by physically attractive which makes a high yuk factor in trying to woo a twelve year old girl.
Leftyhunter
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top