At what point in western Hx did premarital sex become an

The real question should be when did post-marital sex become the norm? My guess is that it became a standard concept during the 1800's.

People have been fucking each other for thousands of years without constraint.

I was just thinking about this, it seems to be the only way to start a relationship with italian women

>>2649638
Isn't only having sex after marriage in the Bible, though?

After the pill

Despite what leftists and libertarian fedoras would tell you, the overwhelming majority of christianized westerners abhorred pre-marital sex like Muslims do today. Exceptions proved the rule.

>>2649638
Interestingly enough it was very much a legal issue during the middle ages.

Issues of inheritance and land ownership. Being born a bastard was an intense disadvantage.

>England's Statute of Merton (1235) stated, regarding illegitimacy: "He is a bastard that is born before the marriage of his parents." This definition also applied to situations when a child's parents could not marry, as when one or both were already married or when the relationship was incestuous

>>2649642
Sure it is,but despite perceptions of past peoples being God fearing puritans who had followed every little detail of the bible, sex has only really become a taboo subject in the West in the past 300 years.

>>2649638
[citation needed]

>>2649655
Yes, if you were of a landowning class in which land could be inheritable. A very small part of society.

>>2649651
I think the prominence of Western prostitution shows the 3rd factor.

It was kept behind closed doors with a reasonable expectation of anonymity.

>>2649642
No. There's a lot about being faithful to your wife and other bits about deviant sexual shit (which may or may not just be Paul's hangups depending on who you talk to), but there's nothing about premarital sex.

>>2649660
A good case study is the Renaissance. A very religious period but marred with many sources depicting sex guides, the frequent use of prostitutes and sodomy. Even Machiavelli writes to a friend about visiting such a prostitute, fucking her, and then vomiting at the sight of her when he removes a towel covering her face.

https://garnlebaron.wordpress.com/sexual_relations_in_renaissance_europe/

I know this is wordpress, but it's got some very good sources in the bibliography. It's the best I can find without linking you to books that you need to buy and I know you won't.

>>2649664
All children were recorded by the local Bishops. The Church was all up in everyone's business, it was the social structure.

Bastards were commonly called whoresons indicating their status.

File: heraclitus-5.jpg (60KB, 900x750px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 900x750px

>>2649675
>when you take the bag off the whore

>>2649682
Again, literally had no impact the lower classes. Probably why there's so many "Fitz" walking around the planet. Also the past is not only England and not every instance of copulation lead to having children.

>>2649675
And I'm sure you have statistics

>>2649694
Well it certainly goes towards ops actual question.

Which is about premarital sex being an accepted norm.

All indicators show that sex was encouraged between married couples and discouraged among those who were not.

Marriage was the social basis of the society, followed by children and the church.

>>2649716
Sure, but people still fucked, like it or not.

>>2649706
>"By Rocke's reckoning homosexuality really was pervasive in Florence. In the small city of just 40,000 people, he estimates that 17,000 men were incriminated on charges of "sodomy" during the 70 year existence of the Office of the Night. That amounts, he points out, to nearly half the male population of the city during two generations."

From FORBIDDEN FRIENDSHIPS: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence. By Michael Rocke

It's an interesting read, he also points out that in the year 1496, 243 young Florentine boys confessed to Sodomy and were let off with fines.

>>2649633
If I'm going to guess probably some time after WW2.

That said, people have always been fucking.

File: 1491879656818.jpg (77KB, 800x566px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x566px

>>2649720
Yes, that's obvious. However it was not an accepted norm.

>>2649738
I disagree but you appear to have a political bias thrown into the mix so there's really no point arguing with you.

>>2649743
So do you, turd.

>>2649746
>herewego.jpg
22 replies of decent discussion until you appeared. That's pretty good for /his/ these days.

>>2649753
What have I posted that has indicated I do?

>>2649758
>PEOPLE FUCK GET OVER IT WHITEY

>>2649756
Hehe fine we'll let the charade continue a bit longer

>>2649761
I genuinely feel sorry you, Anon. Imagine being so engrossed in Internet culture that you can't even have a debate without thinking the other person has an agenda.

Not once did I mention race, not once did put in a political opinion. You're nuts.

>>2649743
Sex out of wedlock was not the cultural norm.

You were normally married right after puberty and unmarried people were kept watch by their families.

Which is why we have so many stories of unfaithful spouses and children who run off together you nitwit.

Because it wasn't the accepted norm.

Get over it

>>2649766
You have an agenda, you are just blind to it.
>im totally bias free because im le smarty science man!

>>2649767
It was frowned upon by the church and by parents, I definitely agree but to see it didn't happen frequently is just to be ignorant.

File: 1491702423338.jpg (203KB, 1508x1252px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1508x1252px

>>2649769
Friend no one said it didn't happen.

Op asked only about the accepted norm in western society.

>>2649768
Why are you so defensive? You're literally getting mad over nothing. Just because I present a different argument based of evidence I have read doesn't mean I'm have some political view on it. This is a history board.

>>2649773
>argument based off evidence
That's an agenda, you blind idiot.

>>2649771
Yes I was offering my two cents on the matter as a whole. I know there are a lot of people who have the idea that everyone at one stage believed that no one was ever naughty and broke the rules.

File: 1432724756686s.jpg (7KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x241px

>>2649775
You're jumping at shadows, mate. I'm genuinely embarrassed for you.

>>2649776
There are very pious societies like that to this day.

It was just more common in western culture in the past.

>>2649780
>shadows
You are no different than those that believed they were free of bias when trying to 'civilize the savages'. Fucking ideologues.

>>2649783
What the fuck are you talking about? How bored are you?

>>2649784
Bored of your stupidity, sure. Very.

>>2649731
Come on now, this sounds complete bullshit. How do you know it wasn't like prison sexuality when the other, natural sex isn't available, people just turn to whatever they can fuck? This culture is present in Central Asia and according to some articles, homosexuality is also rampant is Saudi-Arabia, both of those countries apply strict morals and restrictions on female sexuality, expecting girls to get married as a virgin.
Btw usually 3-5% of the population is homosexual at any given time, roughly speaking.

>>2650679
Keep in mind this was in cities effectively free from religious rule since nobody actually gave a shit about the church unless their army was in town. Anon's numbers were specifically from Florence, which was one of the hearts of the Renaissance, and the heart of the Roman/Greek revival, AND an incredibly wealthy, usually free city. If they wanted to fuck chicks, there were plenty around of every social standing that would be willing

DAE everybody in the past was actually transgender homosexuals

>>2649638
This. I love it when plebs think the majority or western history has been Anglo Protestant in nature when it's been anything but.

>>2649642
Nah, I believe I recall Jacob or one of his sons having sex with an unmarried women disguised as a prostitute that turned out to be his relative. For a while they wanted to burn her, but it was chill in the end.

Genesis has a lot of named characters, many of which only do one, two or three things so I have trouble remembering who did what sometimes.

>>2649780
Stop debating him.

File: images.jpg (7KB, 229x220px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 229x220px

>>2650732
>transgender homosexuals

Not sure if butthurt /pol/lock or well crafted joke

>>2651201

It was Judah, Jacob's 4th son and it wasn't quite that. Judah has his own kids, and one of them marries a woman named Tamar. He, in turn, don't want to have procreative sex with her, and God kills the dude for it. She is then, through levirate marriage, passed to another of his sons (I can't remember if Er or Onan was first.), and a "proper" person back then should have married Tamar off to his youngest son,. Judah is worried about this woman who seems to be a black widow for his kids, and doesn't marry her off.

She, because she wants to have kids of the line due to some old Semitic notions about preserving these things, disguises herself as a prostitute and fucks Judah. But he wants to burn her because she still has a status of promised to Judah's son Shelach, and isn't entirely a free agent.

>the institution of marriage predates procreation

wew

>>2649633
Name?

When has it not? the answer is never.

>>2652390
Sensual Jane

>>2649638
"Pregnant at the altar" was pretty much the norm before, around 50% of weddings based on some 19th century church records in England I believe.
>>2650802
>we wuz puritanz

>>2649666
>It was kept behind closed doors
That's just the thing Satan. It was kept secret back then, and is showed off publicly today. People today have no shame

>>2649633
>ITT: people who demand the utmost rigour from others, but figure they're ok with just an offhand assertion

>>2649633
>At what point in western Hx did premarital sex become an accepted norm?

1960s and 1970s
social stigma against extramarital or premarital sex was still huge in mid 20th century europe
i remember reading some accounts of parents complaining to the nazi government because some nazi party officials encouraged unmarried hitler youth boys and bdm girls to fuck and have children, which was widely abhorred by the population

>>2649731
>By Rocke's reckoning homosexuality really was pervasive in Florence. In the small city of just 40,000 people, he estimates that 17,000 men were incriminated on charges of "sodomy" during the 70 year existence of the Office of the Night. That amounts, he points out, to nearly half the male population of the city during two generation

>he estimates.

I highly doubt this "estimation" is in any way accurate. What was sodomy even classified as? What if two dudes banged one whore to save cash, and got busted for "sodomy" because there were two dudes?

If I had my way, I would tear this old building down.

Well Delilah was a woman, she was fine and fair,
She had good looks, God knows, and coal black hair,
Delilah she gained old Samson's mind.
When first he saw this woman, you know he couldn't believe his mind.

Delilah she climbed up on Samson's knee,
Said tell me where your strength lies if you please.
She spoke so kind and she talked so fair,
Well Samson said, Delilah cut off my hair.

>>2652820
>People today have no shame
No, people today chose to live less hypocritically

>>2651557
Why not both?

ITT: Sex and nudity are shameful acts, make it private
ITT: Storks brought kids, not cock and puss
ITT: Cut your hands if you masturbate
ITT: Remove your eyes if you watch porn

>>2649638
t. tard

>>2655174
He's right about that being the better question, though.

>>2655209
Except pre-marital sex was generally a bad deal for women for much longer than 200 years. Probably millenia unless for those minority cultures which embraced the extended family model.

Without a clear marriage/union/whatever, women risked being left with no support to raise the child. And even more importantly, the risk of dying while giving birth. Something which took the lives of married women just as much. Not saying not all women weren't promiscuous, but that risk was very real and they knew it. I doubt many women took a chance on it that casually, particularly when it was their lives on the line .

>>2649731
>Michael Rocke is an independent scholar who teaches Italian history at Syracuse University in Florence, where he has been a member of the faculty since 1992, and at other American universities in Florence.
It's literally his only publication. He's no scholar.

6 If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases?

>>2655323
Which is why I said the question was good, not the rubbish after it.

>The popular belief that an engagement ring was originally part of the bride price which represented purchase and ownership of the bride,[8] has been called into question by contemporary scholarship.[4]:42 note 105
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_ring#History