this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2024
240 points (99.2% liked)

196

16503 readers
2496 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Happy new year

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 49 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The second paragraph to the right of the photo talks about how our perception of these things changes with time, and while it seems shocking to us now it would once have been taken for granted. It was a big news story at the time and was not taken for granted.

Edit: I guess my wording was a bit off. I meant to say that it was not within the cultural norms of the time. As worded, it sounds like I'm discussing its frequency rather than its level of acceptance - that's my bad.

Intended meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_norm

[โ€“] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

Given that the law was passed two weeks after they were married I think it has already been drafted and the whole subject was probably one of much debate. Also note three neighbouring states passed laws at the same time.

It seems likely that someone said "find a story about under-age marriage for our front page", and these two hapless yokels (or should I say Johns the hapless yokel) were the only ones stupid enough to have their photos taken.

In summary, I think society was working up to passing a law like this, and these two had a bride that was younger than most and got married at the right time.

That said, the author has definitely tried to imply that this sort of marriage was commonplace in the 30s, when it was probably at most "unusual".