Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Pregnancy out of wedlock and perception of disgrace.

Options
1356789

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    political analyst
    Registered Users Posts: 4,450 ✭✭✭political analyst


    Samsonsmasher wrote: »
    The eldest son in a large family with a small or large farm would have to wait until his father passed away before he inherited the land. He might be in his 50s or 60s and still a bachelor until the land passed to him. He would marry a much younger woman who would be expected to be a virgin and produce an heir. There being no contraception there would be a large family and the cycle would repeat itself.

    While the eldest son waited for his inheritance he would have affairs with the daughters of labourers or shop girls or factory girls from the nearest market town. His brothers with no land coming to them had only the priesthood or becoming a brother or Garda or civil servant or join the army or emigration to look forward to. They would also have affairs with girls beneath their class.
    On racing days or after GAA matches in Dublin the brothels in the towns or Monto in Dublin were busy.

    The eldest and prettiest girls with a dowry and land coming to them could expect to marry farmers as long as they renained a virgin and childless. Their sisters could expect to become nuns or nurses or spinster teachers or emigrate. They would have affairs with single or married men.

    A well to do girl could arrange an abortion privately in Ireland or travel to England.
    A middle class girl could have her baby in secret and be on her way.
    A poor girl was doomed to go to the launderies.

    Why would they have sex with the husbands of other women? Had they no self-respect?


  • Options
    #63
    Baybay
    Registered Users Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭Baybay


    political analyst wrote: »
    Why would they have sex with the husbands of other women? Had they no self-respect?

    The husbands?


  • Options
    #64
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    mariaalice wrote: »
    There was another article I read a few years ago, about a pregnant student in the 1960s, and her brother was afraid his career in the civil service would be affected by having an unmarried mother as a sister. Again hard to comprehend.

    Not really, when you consider that in totalitarian regimes, one person being marked out as "politically unreliable" could bring suspicion (and more) on the heads of other family members. The circumstances and uniforms may differ, but the mentality tends to be the same.


  • Options
    #65
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 5,505 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Potatoeman wrote: »
    I don’t know. I’m not religious but have family that are, one that was a victim of abuse. People love to bash the church and they have a lot to answer for but then the same people will want their kids in a religious school be baptised etc when it suits them. The state did nothing and it was ordinary people enabling all this. If you want the church gone then it’s for everything, you can’t come back and decide you want be be buried in a Christian graveyard because your family were.

    Yeah this drives me bananas. Lots of my friends have baptised their kids because granny would be disappointed if they didn't, and they have a big bash for the communion because it'll be a fun day out. They don't see the harm but to me it just perpetuates the hold that the church has on us. I have three kids, none of whom are baptized. They have to go to the local school which is run by the RCC and they just read or draw during religion. That suits me fine, at least they're doing something constructive with their time.

    Church gone for everything suits me fine. Having a nice church for the wedding and being buried in a leafy graveyard doesn't outweigh raping children and selling babies, IMO.

    I just wonder if we'll ever get to a tipping point where people realise all these horrendous things the Church did were not the work of a few bad apples.


  • Options
    #66
    slipperyox
    Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭slipperyox


    eviltwin wrote: »
    When I got pregnant out of wedlock my mother, who had up until then been heavily involved in the church doing flowers, teas at events etc, was told her services were no longer required. That was in the 90’s. The priest was never friendly with her again. They loved shaming people.

    No different to today with, with "cancel culture"
    cf kevin spacey, et al


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,617 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Different eras and times and attitudes and behaviors

    And it is not just around pregnancy out of wedlock...

    Just me personally, even today I see children more cherished and doted on and loved than years ago...more affection and caring and all around devotion...

    That is due to changes in attitudes, laws, behaviors,etc...

    I am not at all outraged or shocked that unmarried mothers felt stigmatized and shamed. I don't agree that they should be, but I don't have near the same feelings of shame, anger, hate as I would for say, all those poor children who were destroyed and beaten and raped and brutalized by adults in industrial schools...the thoughts of their suffering makes me queasy.....

    Unmarried mothers who felt stigma and shame.....not right. And I do, of course, sympathize......but these were the times back then for society...


  • Options
    #68
    Electric Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭Electric Sheep


    political analyst wrote: »
    Why would they have sex with the husbands of other women? Had they no self-respect?

    They probably had more respect for themselves than the married men appear to have had for their wives.


  • Options
    #69
    BloodBath
    Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    walshb wrote: »
    Different eras and times and attitudes and behaviors

    And it is not just around pregnancy out of wedlock...

    Just me personally, even today I see children more cherished and doted on and loved than years ago...more affection and caring and all around devotion...

    That is due to changes in attitudes, laws, behaviors,etc...

    I am not at all outraged of shocked that unmarried mothers felt stigmatized and shamed. I don't agree that they should be, but I don't have near the same feelings of shame, anger, hate as I would for say, all those poor children who were destroyed and beaten and raped and brutalized by adults in industrial schools...the thoughts of their suffering makes me queasy.....

    Amazing what we could achieve in such a short time once we got the church out from under us. We should finish them off completely now.


  • Options
    #70
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,617 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Amazing what we could achieve in such a short time once we got the church out from under us. We should finish them off completely now.

    I do not get this venomous want to break the church

    And I came from a family that never went to mass, and had little time for religion...

    There were many good and caring and decent people in the church then, and now....

    There is absolutely a place in society for churches....


  • Options
    #71
    Samsonsmasher
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 610 ✭✭✭Samsonsmasher


    walshb wrote: »
    Different eras and times and attitudes and behaviors

    And it is not just around pregnancy out of wedlock...

    Just me personally, even today I see children more cherished and doted on and loved than years ago...more affection and caring and all around devotion...

    That is due to changes in attitudes, laws, behaviors,etc...

    I am not at all outraged of shocked that unmarried mothers felt stigmatized and shamed. I don't agree that they should be, but I don't have near the same feelings of shame, anger, hate as I would for say, all those poor children who were destroyed and beaten and raped and brutalized by adults in industrial schools...the thoughts of their suffering makes me queasy.....

    Unmarried mothers who felt stigma and shame.....not right. And I do, of course, sympathize......but these were the times back then for society...

    You paint a rosy picture don't you?
    If you are an unwanted child now you are murdered in an abortion clinic. 6666 were slaughtered in 2019.
    Different era and different values but hypocrisy is alive and well in modern Ireland.
    We have swapped priests and nuns and brothers for journalists feminist social justice warriors activists ngos and politicians.
    Men are stigmatised now not women.
    History repeats itself just with different costumes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    BloodBath
    Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    walshb wrote: »
    I do not get this venomous want to break the church

    And I came from a family that never went to mass, and had little time for religion...

    There were many good and caring and decent people in the church then, and now....

    There is absolutely a place in society for churches....

    If you don't get it then you need to study the history of the RCC. Supporting them is akin to supporting the Nazis. That is not remotely hyperbolic either.

    Idd that there are and were many good people in the church as I'm sure there were many good people in the Nazi party. It doesn't change the fact that it's a disgusting organization and those good people have many other avenues like charities to help people and do good.

    There is a place in society for religion. The RCC though imo are finished. There's no goodwill left for them and rightfully so.


  • Options
    #73
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    Call whatever you like. The priest, flanked by some of the local religious nuts, came knocking on my mother's door. They also called with my grandparents to convince them to get my mother to give me up. I've spoken about this before on here. Believe it, or not believe it, I don't care but I've posted enough on here to have been recognised in real life more than once, so there little point in me making something up like that when it's easy enough to confirmed.

    There is a silver lining to everything.
    Your story is completely true. I know because I was in your Mam's position in 1990. Except my family had disowned me for the time being. The priest was sent to where I was living to organise having the baby "removed" after birth.
    Some things shape us. I had been a quiet studious person keeping to myself but once you have been roused by the protective instinct of impending motherhood to give a priest a full-flown loud-throated unrestrained bollocking and sent him practically running down the road to get away from you, you will be forever after an independent stubborn woman who will take not one single ounce of shyte from anyone ever again, not even if they were the Emperor of the Universe. So, there's that. :)


  • Options
    #74
    saabsaab
    Registered Users Posts: 7,760 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Amazing what we could achieve in such a short time once we got the church out from under us. We should finish them off completely now.


    What do you mean by that. Put them in camps with their followers?


  • Options
    #75
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    walshb wrote: »
    I do not get this venomous want to break the church

    And I came from a family that never went to mass, and had little time for religion...

    There were many good and caring and decent people in the church then, and now....

    There is absolutely a place in society for churches....

    I think when you break it down what people want is the church to stay out of public life. Most people have no problem with religion, its a personal choice and everyone should be free to practice their faith but when you see church hierarchy speaking on social issues and trying to sway public opinion on certain topics that affect everyone regardless of religion its very hard not to say something. I think most of us who grew up in this country in the shadow of the church, especially those of us over 40 and the non religious, are just frustrated at how things are so slow to change.


  • Options
    #76
    BloodBath
    Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    saabsaab wrote: »
    What do you mean by that. Put them in camps with their followers?

    No I mean remove their remaining ties from the state, seize and redistribute assets owned by the church, using funds gained from these assets to pay reparation's for child rape cases and mother and baby home victims instead of offloading it to the taxpayer.

    Use properties owned by the church for social housing and emergency housing for the homeless etc.


  • Options
    #77
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    walshb wrote: »
    There is absolutely a place in society for churches....

    And they need to know their place.


  • Options
    #78
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,617 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I think when you break it down what people want is the church to stay out of public life. Most people have no problem with religion, its a personal choice and everyone should be free to practice their faith but when you see church hierarchy speaking on social issues and trying to sway public opinion on certain topics that affect everyone regardless of religion its very hard not to say something. I think most of us who grew up in this country in the shadow of the church, especially those of us over 40 and the non religious, are just frustrated at how things are so slow to change.

    They are part of public life....always have been and always will be...they are people......

    They play a very important role in society....

    Are we to now want to completely banish church and religion because there were nasty deeds done years ago?

    I still won't go to church, but I have used their services, like we all have, through sad times and happy times...I personally found my experience to be comforting and needed.

    They don't have to dictate and own society....nobody is saying this, but this going from one extreme (where they dominated society) to the other extreme (where we want to crush them) is ludicrous, but not surprising...there seems to be very little balance and middle-ground with people anymore...


  • Options
    #79
    BloodBath
    Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    Some of us don't want to see them regain any sort of power. We've seen what happens when they have it.

    There is no coming back from centuries of abuse. They have too much blood on their hands to ever be forgiven.


  • Options
    #80
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 5,505 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    walshb wrote: »
    I do not get this venomous want to break the church

    And I came from a family that never went to mass, and had little time for religion...

    There were many good and caring and decent people in the church then, and now....

    There is absolutely a place in society for churches....

    There is - it's in the churches.

    Not in education. Not in healthcare. Not in dictating legislation.

    If we all said, right lads, we're handing over the education of 90% of our kids to the Muslim Council of Ireland, and your hospital care will now be conducted according to Hindu ethical guidelines, how would people react?

    Let the priests stay in their churches, let those who want to be part of religion be part of it. Let the rest of us just get on with our lives


  • Options
    #81
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,617 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Some of us don't want to see them regain any sort of power. We've seen what happens when they have it.

    There is no coming back from centuries of abuse. They have too much blood on their hands to ever be forgiven.

    Define power here?

    It is 2021 now...the church and the people and the church/people are all living side by side...

    The whole world is jostling for power.......everyone....it's what makes us who we are.....

    I cannot see any way the church regains this power that you speak of.....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Amazing what we could achieve in such a short time once we got the church out from under us. We should finish them off completely now.

    Dont worry the RCC will be replaced by 2033. Be very careful what you wish for, the same type of characters will re-appear in different garbs. The old religious based charities will be replaced by NGOs. The old saints will be journalists and social influencers. The old martyrs will be replaced with new martyrs. What is the new boss like? Same as the old boss. Nuns have been replaced by perpetually single teachers and spinster social workers.

    For me it is the end of western civilisation and bears many of the similarities of the fall of the Roman empire. It is not just the religion or culture. (barely scratching the surface) The devaluation of Money and inflation of education, infanticide/abortion, obsession of sex and staying young. extending old age beyond reasonable means, young men refusing to do military service, extended wars, inequal application of the law, shameless drug use.... the list goes on.

    Me? I can see this coming from far off. While you decry religion, you were warned in the Bible about centralised government (Tower of Babel), when and not if, Western Culture falls it will be spectacular, Islam will fall shortly afterwards and will be less so.


  • Options
    #83
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    walshb wrote: »
    They are part of public life....always have been and always will be...they are people......

    They play a very important role in society....

    Are we to now want to completely banish church and religion because there were nasty deeds done years ago?

    I still won't go to church, but I have used their services, like we all have, through sad times and happy times...I personally found my experience to be comforting and needed.

    They don't have to dictate and own society....nobody is saying this, but this going from one extreme (where they dominated society) to the other extreme (where we want to crush them) is ludicrous, but not surprising...there seems to be very little balance and middle-ground with people anymore...

    They do play an important role and unfortunately that role impacts everyone regardless of your faith. That's not right. They are entitled to their opinions on issues and can tell their believers what they should do but do the rest of us really need to be included in that? I certainly don't want to see them banished or disbanded by force - if they die out let it be because people have chosen to to partake it it anymore. I just want to be left live my life in peace without someone of any religion taking issue with how I do so.


  • Options
    #84
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    If we all said, right lads, we're handing over the education of 90% of our kids to the Muslim Council of Ireland,

    Shhhhhhh what do you think is going on with Ha'lal? 2% tax at each stage on food and they want medicines and biomedical devices certified. You are being taxed and you dont even know it.


  • Options
    #85
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,697 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    storker wrote: »
    Not really, when you consider that in totalitarian regimes, one person being marked out as "politically unreliable" could bring suspicion (and more) on the heads of other family members. The circumstances and uniforms may differ, but the mentality tends to be the same.

    It's no different today.

    If you are going for a job with certain agencies, your family will be investigated. You may fail vetting, for reasons you know nothing about.


  • Options
    #86
    BloodBath
    Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    walshb wrote: »
    Define power here?

    It is 2021 now...the church and the people and the church/people are all living side by side...

    The whole world is jostling for power.......everyone....it's what makes us who we are.....

    I cannot see any way the church regains this power that you speak of.....

    Power as in controlling state apparatus like education and healthcare which they still have a strong hold of.
    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    Dont worry the RCC will be replaced by 2033. Be very careful what you wish for, the same type of characters will re-appear in different garbs. The old religious based charities will be replaced by NGOs. The old saints will be journalists and social influencers. The old martyrs will be replaced with new martyrs. What is the new boss like? Same as the old boss. Nuns have been replaced by perpetually single teachers and spinster social workers.

    For me it is the end of western civilisation and bears many of the similarities of the fall of the Roman empire. It is not just the religion or culture. (barely scratching the surface) The devaluation of Money and inflation of education, infanticide/abortion, obsession of sex and staying young. extending old age beyond reasonable means, young men refusing to do military service, extended wars, inequal application of the law, shameless drug use.... the list goes on.

    Me? I can see this coming from far off. While you decry religion, you were warned in the Bible about centralised government (Tower of Babel), when and not if, Western Culture falls it will be spectacular, Islam will fall shortly afterwards and will be less so.

    No doubt, it's the worst of human nature but every time we rise up and crush it, learn, improve and move on. I don't pay any heed to the bible, a book written and re-written, edited and omitted by men, not god, over centuries as a tool to control the masses.

    While I'm sure you don't agree, peoples innate morals have for the most part superseded religion. We live in a better, more loving caring world than we ever have. It's still massively flawed with the same greed, corruption, tribalistic division and evil that was always there but imo it's getting better with abusers being called out more than ever.

    Maybe we can evolve more before it's too late. Removing power from the RCC was a big stepping stone in that direction.


  • Options
    #87
    saabsaab
    Registered Users Posts: 7,760 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    The shame and disgrace rested with the women. How many of us in the past thought about the consequences if it went too far and she got pregnant? As a friend of mine said at the time 'sowing your wild oats' was grand and it was up to her to take precautions (condoms were illegal too unless you were married). Generally young men of my time didn't give it a second thought when you 'got lucky' after a night out in the city or big town.


  • Options
    #88
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    saabsaab wrote: »
    The shame and disgrace rested with the women. How many of us in the past thought about the consequences if it went too far and she got pregnant? As a friend of mine said at the time 'sowing your wild oats' was grand and it was up to her to take precautions (condoms were illegal too unless you were married). Generally young men of my time didn't give it a second thought when you 'got lucky' after a night out in the city or big town.

    There is so much wrong with this post I don’t even know where to start.


  • Options
    #89
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    There is so much wrong with this post I don’t even know where to start.

    My interpretation - and could be completely wrong ! - is that he was just describing an attitude or the way it was back then. And it pretty much was like that in many cases. Most people will behave according to the mores of the time they live in - they won't give things too much thought, unfortunately. I mean, as an example, many parents in the 1960s would leather the crap out of their kids to make them behave because it was the done thing - it is hard to believe now that people would do that to their own children!


  • Options
    #90
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    BloodBath wrote: »

    While I'm sure you don't agree, peoples innate morals have for the most part superseded religion. We live in a better, more loving caring world than we ever have. It's still massively flawed with the same greed, corruption, tribalistic division and evil that was always there but imo it's getting better with abusers being called out more than ever.

    Maybe we can evolve more before it's too late. Removing power from the RCC was a big stepping stone in that direction.

    Hmmm I definitely dont agree that the world is better without religion. We definitely dont live in a more loving and better society. Then there would be no need for social workers, suicides are growing and drug addiction is out of control.

    This is a natural cycle in society. the catch is not to be the last one in the chain.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    BloodBath
    Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭BloodBath


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    Hmmm I definitely dont agree that the world is better without religion. We definitely dont live in a more loving and better society. Then there would be no need for social workers, suicides are growing and drug addiction is out of control.

    This is a natural cycle in society. the catch is not to be the last one in the chain.

    We do, you have no memory or knowledge of recent history or anything before that if you disagree with that statement.

    I never said it was perfect, I said it was better. We still have a long way to go.


Advertisement