Well, it is taking so long to get a response, I guess I will respond to myself for the time being:
You mention some of the historical and sociological factors which made people more receptive to a "personal values" morality, but one should not over- rate them. For example, in the civil rights movement, the leadership was provided by preachers, like Dr. King, and many respectable citizens participated in the marches and freedom rides, so that it was more a matter of pitting morality against assertions about preserving "our way of life", as the segregationists kept saying. Furthermore, no one in their right minds thought that Bull Connor represented the epitome of authority in the United States, and though the Kennedys needed some prodding, the federal government backed civil rights, from the Supreme Court to Eisenhower's use of the National Guard to enforce desegregation in Little Rock; from the FBI involvement in pursuing racial terrorists to the Civil Rights Act of 64, and so on.
With Vietnam, the policy was certainly failed, but there was always the question of why? When the voting age was lowered to 18, the majority of newly enfranchised voters voted for Nixon, and when McGovern was pitted against Nixon, Nixon won in a landslide. A lot of people blamed those who demonstrated, for creating a political situation to exploit. Certainly, it was more complicated than that, and we might have been better off to have stayed out, but there were many people who protested the war,including myself, who wondered, watching scenes of pandemonium at the fall of Saigon, or hearing about reeducation camps, or seeing film of boat people desperately fleeing to Hong Kong, whether we had made a mistake. Even George McGovern called for intervention against Pol Pot.
Affluent women, and some who were lower middle class, often stayed home with the children, but it was a luxury that most working class women, and many lower middle class women, couldn't afford. In my family, most of the women worked until my mother's generation. After that, some did, some didn't, but even my mother often watched children for extra money. Yes, women were increasingly contemplating jobs and careers that had been reserved for men, but it was not new to have them in the workplace, and thus it was less revolutionary than many people have portrayed it. Our picture of the 50s is very limited, focusing on the moderately prosperous, war weary and intent upon nesting.
It is true that improved contraception was bound to lead to more sexual experimentation. However, it does not altogether account for the social attitudes that supported no- fault divorce, wife- swapping, promiscuity as a life style, and so forth.
So, yes, while there was questioning and turmoil, some of the social revolutionary aspects have been exaggerated, and for many, it was a time of moral seriousness more than experimentation........ |
