Hooking Up : Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus by Kathleen Bogle (e book reader android txt) 📗

women, the fact that these lists were created provides evidence of how much peers were involved in rating and monitoring each other’s dating partners.

THE DATING ERA—“GOING STEADY”

Despite the prominence of the norms discussed above throughout the 1920s and 1930s, they did not last. Dating continued; however, the onset and aftermath of World War II in the 1940s led to a new version of the dating script.28 During this time, men literally became a scarce resource.

Millions of men were now in the armed forces and went overseas during the war and, unfortunately, thousands of men never made it back home alive. Awareness of this scarcity of eligible men changed the tone of the dating scene. Popularity in terms of getting the greatest number of F RO M DAT I N G TO H O O K I N G U P

17

high-ranking dates possible went out with the war. In its place came an increasing focus on exclusive dating or “going steady” with one person.

College girls who reveled in the number of dates they went on with a variety of partners in the 1920s and 1930s were replaced by college girls hoping to be “pinned” to one fraternity man or hoping to be engaged soon to their soldier fighting overseas.29 Dating took on a more serious tone for men during this era as well. Men who wanted to be “big men on campus” during the rating and dating era now longed to settle down.30

The end of World War II ushered in a period of economic prosper-ity in the United States, which also had an effect on dating. Employment opportunities and a booming economy gave young men the financial stability to afford to marry sooner than they could in the previous era.31 It is well documented that in the years after the end of World War II, the median age of marriage dropped, the number of children per family grew, and, in general, a heightened focus on a harmonious do-mestic life took hold.32

Like the previous rating and dating script, the going-steady era carried its own set of conventions. “Steadies” often gave each other something to wear to indicate to onlookers that they were “taken.” Such symbols were the youths’ answer to a wedding ring. For example, a young man might give his steady girlfriend his class ring to wear or the letter sweater he received from his participation in athletics. Local conventions varied on this point, with some steadies exchanging rings, the girl wearing the boy’s ID bracelet, or even both steadies donning matching

“steady jackets.”33 One might wonder whether such conventions were followed in order to make it easy for those who were unattached to know who was “off limits,” or whether this practice was a way to indicate who had the status of a steady dating relationship—or perhaps both.

In addition to symbols of steady relationships, other conventions were widely practiced. Specifically, young men were expected to take their steady girlfriends on a certain number of dates per week. This practice manifested itself with somewhat different local norms in terms of the exact number.34 However, as in the rating and dating era, steady dating was not expected to lead directly to marriage. There could be many steadies along the way before a mate was chosen.35

The going-steady era has been immortalized in films like Grease, which portrays students in the senior year of high school in the 1950s.

Many elements of the going-steady script are brought to life here, such as young women wearing their steady’s ring or letterman’s sweater, 18

F RO M DAT I N G TO H O O K I N G U P

and having Saturday night dates at a dance, malt shop, or drive-in movie. The film also depicts the sexual norms of the time period with the “good girl” lead character, Sandy, fighting off advances from her boyfriend, Danny.

CALLING VERSUS DATING

In addition to the changing norms for how young men and women got together and formed relationships between the calling and dating eras, there were corresponding changes in power, peer influence, and degrees of sexual intimacy. During the calling era, young women (and their mothers) controlled the invitation to “call.” With dating, it was exclusively the man’s right to ask a woman out on a date in order to enjoy the pleasure of her company for an evening. This represents a fundamental shift in power: men were now in control. This shift was likely due to the monetary aspect of dating.36 Men were expected to pay for themselves and their date. At this time, it was assumed that women either earned less money than men or had no money of their own at all.

Thus, it was the man’s responsibility to treat the woman to dinner, the theater, or some other form of entertainment. But with this ability to pay came power. Men had the power to ask women out. Women, of course, had the power to decline an invitation, but could not initiate a date without risking their reputation as respectable young women. Additionally, men had the power to decide when and where the date would take place. Since he was paying, he had to decide what he felt like doing for the date, what he could afford, and how much the woman was

“worth” in terms of spending.37

Power was not the only thing that changed with the dating era; peers became increasingly important as well. With calling, the family had had the greatest influence over the choice of a gentleman caller.

Dating, on the other hand, moved into the public sphere, at least partially away from the watchful eyes of parents. This was particularly the case on the college campus, where parents were even farther removed from the process. In the absence of parents, peers began to exert greater influence over one’s choice of a dating partner. Furthermore, since dating had largely become somewhat of a popularity contest, it became important to follow the dominant script of the times (e.g., going steady) in order to be part of the “in” crowd.

F